U.D. Registry, Inc. v. Municipal Court

[673]

Opinion

RYLAARSDAM, J.

The superior court issued a writ ordering two municipal courts to grant a company offering a tenant screening service to landlords, access to all unlawful detainer files within the period public access is denied under Code of Civil Procedure

1

section 1161.2. The municipal courts appeal; we apply the statutory mandate and reverse.

Facts

U.D. Registry, Inc. (UDR), a tenant screening company, sought an order allowing it access to all unlawful detainer filings in the municipal courts of the North Orange County and West Orange County Judicial Districts. The North Orange County Court denied the request on ground it did not find good cause. The West Orange County Court denied the motion, finding (1) the statute does not contemplate blanket orders, (2) the exceptions to the statute must be on a case-by-case basis on a showing of good cause, and (3) granting blanket orders would frustrate the intent of the statute.

Thereafter, UDR filed a petition for writ of mandate in the superior court. The superior court granted the writ, finding that “[section] 1161.2 defines suc[c]ess of this pilot project as a reduction of at least fifteen percent in the number of unmeritorious ‘Arrieta’ claims and/or tenant (defendant) bankruptcy filings. . . . Prohibiting credit reporting services such as plaintiff from access to the files will have no effect on the number of ‘Arrieta’ claims or bankruptcy petitions. . . . Respondents shall, upon receipt of this writ, allow petitioner access to all requested unlawful detainer filings within their respective courts, pursuant to the procedure set forth in [section] 1161.2.”

Discussion

This appeal from a judgment in a mandamus proceeding is appealable under section 904.1, subdivision (a)(1).

(People

v.

Municipal Court (Morandola)

(1979) 97 Cal.App.3d 444, 447 [158 Cal.Rptr. 739].)