.png)
Pro Tem Judges in Small Claims Court: A Challenge for Security Deposit Disputes
- Stephanie S. Germani, Esq.
- 5 days ago
- 5 min read
Security deposit disputes are among the most common landlord-tenant issues we handle at Germani Law. When these disputes end up in Small Claims court, tenants often face a double challenge: “lackadaisical landlords” who ignore California’s strict security deposit laws and temporary judges who may not properly apply these laws. This combination can create significant obstacles for tenants seeking justice.
Understanding California’s Security Deposit Laws
California Civil Code Section 1950.5 clearly outlines landlord obligations regarding security deposits. This law, often referenced in lease agreements, requires landlords to:
Return the security deposit within 21 days after the tenant vacates
Provide an itemized statement explaining any deductions
Include copies of invoices or receipts for deductions exceeding $125
Notify tenants of their right to request an initial inspection before moving out
Photograph the condition of the rental unit if they intend to deduct any amount from a tenant’s security deposit for repairs or cleaning.
Use deposits only for specific purposes: unpaid rent, damage repair beyond normal wear and tear, necessary cleaning, and remedying defaults in returning property
Recent legislation has further strengthened these protections. As of July 1, 2024, California law limits security deposits to one month's rent for most landlords, with narrow exceptions for smaller property owners.
When Landlords Ignore Their Legal Obligations
Despite these clear requirements, many landlords fail to comply. As one San Diego County commissioner aptly labeled them, “lackadaisical landlords” often:
Ignore the 21-day deadline for returning deposits
Fail to provide itemized statements for deductions
Neglect to offer the required pre-move-out inspection
Improperly deduct for normal wear and tear
Charge for cleaning beyond what's necessary to restore the unit to its original condition
According to California law, when landlords violate these requirements in “bad faith,” tenants can seek not only the return of their deposit but also statutory damages of up to twice the amount of the security deposit. However, studies show that while tenants often prevail in recovering their deposits, bad faith penalties are rarely awarded, creating little deterrence for improper withholding.
Pro Tem Judges: A Mixed Bag in Small Claims Court
Small Claims Court is designed to be accessible to people without attorneys, making it the typical venue for security deposit disputes. However, due to the high volume of cases in California courts, many Small Claims cases are heard by “pro tem” (temporary) judges rather than regular sitting judges.
What Exactly Is a Pro Tem Judge?
Pro tem judges are attorneys appointed to serve temporarily as judges. According to California Rules of Court, these attorneys must:
Be members of the State Bar of California for at least 10 years (or 5 years with good cause)
Be in good standing with no disciplinary actions pending
Complete required training, including courses on bench conduct, ethics, and small claims procedures
While these requirements seem robust, the actual training on small claims matters is minimal—only 3 hours specifically on small claims issues. This limited training often leaves pro tem judges underprepared for the complexities of landlord-tenant law.
The Granberry v. Islay Investments Precedent
A landmark case that every pro tem judge should know—but many don't—is Granberry v. Islay Investments (1995). This California Supreme Court case established that if a landlord fails to provide a written accounting of security deposit deductions within 21 days, the landlord must return the entire deposit. Even if the landlord later claims legitimate deductions, their failure to comply with the 21-day requirement forfeits their right to retain any portion of the deposit.
Additionally, the Court ruled that if a landlord has failed in good faith to follow the proper procedures, they may still pursue damages for unpaid rent, repairs, and cleaning in a separate judicial proceeding—but they cannot simply keep the deposit without following proper procedures first.
A Troubling Example
Recently, a tenant sued her former landlord in San Diego County Small Claims Court for failing to return or account for a $4,000 security deposit. When the pro tem judge asked if the landlord had attempted to return the security deposit, the landlord candidly admitted, “Absolutely not.”
Under Granberry v. Islay Investments, this admission should have been case-closed—the landlord violated the law by not providing an accounting within 21 days and admitted to making no attempt to return the deposit. The tenant should have been awarded the full deposit plus potential statutory damages for bad faith.
However, the pro tem judge apparently failed to apply the law correctly. This case illustrates how even when the law is clear, pro tem judges unfamiliar with tenant law may make incorrect rulings, disadvantaging tenants who know their rights.
Protecting Your Rights in Small Claims Court
If you find yourself in Small Claims court with a security deposit dispute, remember these important strategies:
1. Know Your Right to Refuse a Pro Tem Judge
You are not required to consent to having your case heard by a pro tem judge. California Rules of Court provide that parties must be notified a temporary judge will be hearing cases and informed of their “right to have the matter heard before a judge, commissioner, or referee of the court.” While refusing may result in rescheduling your case, it might be worthwhile if you have concerns about the judge’s familiarity with tenant law.
2. Come Prepared to Educate the Court
Bring printed copies of:
California Civil Code Section 1950.5
The Granberry v. Islay Investments case summary
Your lease agreement
All communications with your landlord
Photos of the property condition
Proof of your request for an initial inspection (if applicable)
While judges are supposed to know the law, being prepared to respectfully point to specific statutes and cases can be helpful when dealing with pro tem judges who may not regularly handle landlord-tenant matters.
3. Clearly Articulate the Legal Violations
Instead of simply asking for your deposit back, clearly articulate:
The specific provisions of Civil Code 1950.5 that were violated
The timeline of events showing the landlord's failure to comply with the 21-day requirement
Why the Granberry case supports your position
Evidence of bad faith that might justify statutory damages
4. Know Your Post-Judgment Options
If you receive an unfavorable ruling based on an incorrect application of law, you can file a Request to Correct or Cancel Judgment (Form SC-108) on the grounds of “an incorrect or erroneous legal basis for the decision.” This must be filed promptly after the judgment. But plaintiffs in a Small Claims case cannot appeal the judgment; only the Defendant can
Knowledge Is Your Best Protection
Security deposit disputes in Small Claims court present unique challenges, especially when faced with both landlords and judges who don't follow the law. By understanding your rights under California Civil Code 1950.5, recognizing the limitations of pro tem judges, and being prepared to advocate for yourself, you can significantly improve your chances of a favorable outcome.
At Germani Law, we believe in empowering tenants with knowledge to protect their rights. While Small Claims court doesn't allow attorney representation at hearings, consulting with an attorney beforehand can help you prepare a strong case. If you’re facing a security deposit dispute or other landlord-tenant issue, contact us for a consultation to ensure you’re fully prepared to navigate these challenging waters.
댓글