Trial and appellate advocacy
A significant ruling can change the course of a tenant’s case. Jonathan D. Winters brings experience with published appellate proceedings and writ advocacy to the evaluation of housing-related court decisions.
Published precedent: Hersey v. Vopava
Jonathan represented the tenant in Hersey v. Vopava (2019). The Court of Appeal reversed and remanded the amended judgment incorporating the post-trial costs and attorney-fee order. The decision addressed pre-offer costs and successive settlement offers under Code of Civil Procedure section 998. It did not reverse the underlying damages award.
Alternative writ concerning discovery-referee costs
On August 14, 2025, in case B347488, the Court of Appeal issued an alternative writ concerning the appointment of a discovery referee in tenant litigation. The order required the trial court either to vacate and reconsider the appointment under the statutory criteria—including exceptional circumstances and each party’s ability to pay—or to show cause why a peremptory writ should not issue.
This was a procedural order, not a damages award or a final determination of the tenants’ underlying claims. The subsequent disposition is not described here.
Prompt review matters
Appeals and writ petitions follow different procedures. A consultation should address the order, when notice was served, the available record and any approaching deadline. Contact the office by phone about urgent matters; submitting this website form does not preserve a deadline or stay an eviction.
Can the firm review an eviction-related ruling?
Contact the office promptly to discuss the ruling and whether the matter falls within the firm’s available representation. Acceptance is case-specific. For general tenant court resources, visit California Courts Self-Help.
Past results do not guarantee a similar outcome. See case results and precedent.
Appellate notice of intent to grant tenant writ relief
In a tenant matter, an appellate court issued a notice stating its intent to grant Jonathan’s clients a peremptory writ in the first instance. The court concluded that the landlord’s notice to cure or quit was defective because it did not comply with the Los Angeles County COVID-19 Tenant Protections Resolution’s 30-day notice requirement. The matter later resolved confidentially. Client names, the opposing party, the case number and settlement terms are not disclosed.
Writ of mandate obtained in banking matter
In an earlier banking matter, Jonathan obtained a writ of mandate after a guardian was ordered against his client without first affording the client a court hearing. Client and case-identifying details are not disclosed.