From time to time, the Judicial Council updates the forms landlords use when filing unlawful detainer actions. The following forms have changed, effective January 1, 2012. You can download them from the Judicial Council website:
This form is filled out by the winning landlord who has a money judgment that can’t be satisfied by the security deposit. It is given to the sheriff or marshal, who will use it to take money out of the tenant’s bank savings or checking account. The updated form complies with the state law that requires, somewhere near the case number, a statement on the form whether the writ has been issued per the court’s limited or unlimited jurisdiction. The sheriff or marshal will return writs that lack this information.
Virtually all evictions are heard in the limited jurisdiction part of Superior Court (that is, the amount of back rent demanded is less than $25,000), so you should check that box.
Landlords who have won a money judgment that cannot be satisfied by the tenant’s security deposit may satisfy the debt by garnishing the tenant’s wages. This form will be sent to the sheriff or marshal (or a registered process server) in the county in which the tenant works. The updated form includes these changes:
Item 1. You may now place the tenant’s Social Security number on form WG-0035, Confidential Statement of Judgment Debtor’s Social Security Number, a new form for 2012; or state that you don’t know it.
Item 4. This question does not apply to landlords with a judgment for rent. Items 4a, 4b, and 4c ask whether the judgment is for child support or alimony, or to collect in whole or in part on a judgment based on elder or dependent adult financial abuse. Do not check any of these boxes.
The Answer is provided for the reader’s information only; obviously, a landlord would not file this form.
Attachment page option. Tenants may now use a separate attachment page (Attachment to Judicial Council Form, MC 025), for claiming that certain of the complaint’s statements are false (Item 2b1), or to deny statements based on the defendant’s lack of information and belief (Item 2b2).
Item 3i: Affirmative defense of eviction based on domestic violence status. Item 3 lists several “affirmative defenses”—claims that, if found to be true, will defeat the landlord’s attempt to evict. A new defense, Item 3i, claims that the eviction is based on acts against the defendant (or a member of the defendant’s household) that constitute domestic violence, sexual assault, or stalking. (Ca. Code of Civil Proc. § 1161.3.)
You can view and download the updated Answer—Unlawful Detainer, on the Judicial Council website.