## Facts

- Marina Point, Ltd. owned and managed an 846-unit apartment complex in Marina Del Rey, California.
- Stephen and Lois Wolfson rented an apartment in February 1974 under a one-year lease and lived there with their minor child.
- During the lease term, the landlord adopted a policy intended to exclude families with minor children by refusing to rent to new families with children and by declining to renew leases of existing tenants with children.
- When the Wolfsons sought renewal in 1975, the landlord refused to renew solely because of the “no children” policy and filed an unlawful detainer action to evict them.
- The trial court upheld the policy, finding that children as a group were noisier and more disruptive than adults and concluding the policy did not violate the Unruh Civil Rights Act.

## Issues

1. Whether the Unruh Civil Rights Act (Cal. Civ. Code § 51) prohibits an apartment owner from refusing to rent to families solely because they include minor children.
2. Whether apartment landlords are “business establishments” covered by the Unruh Civil Rights Act.
3. Whether a categorical exclusion based on generalized assumptions about a class constitutes “arbitrary discrimination” under the Unruh Civil Rights Act.

## Decision

- The California Supreme Court reversed the judgment for the landlord.
- The court held the landlord’s blanket “no children” policy violated the Unruh Civil Rights Act.
- The court concluded apartment landlords are “business establishments” within the Act’s coverage.
- The court treated the policy as arbitrary, class-based discrimination because it relied on generalized predictions about children rather than specific misconduct by particular tenants.
- Because the case was resolved on statutory grounds, the court declined to decide the tenants’ constitutional claims.

## Legal Principles

- The Unruh Civil Rights Act applies broadly to “all persons” and to “all business establishments of every kind whatsoever,” including landlords who rent residential apartments.
- The Act is not limited to the enumerated protected classifications; it bars arbitrary discrimination by business establishments in providing accommodations and services.
- A business may respond to actual misconduct through individualized, behavior-based measures, but may not impose a categorical exclusion based on group generalizations.
- A blanket policy excluding all families with minor children from rental housing constitutes arbitrary discrimination under the Unruh Civil Rights Act.

## Conclusion

The court held that a landlord operating an apartment complex may not categorically refuse to rent to or renew leases for families solely because they have minor children; such a class-based exclusion is arbitrary discrimination prohibited by the Unruh Civil Rights Act.


Marina Point, Ltd. v. Wolfson, 30 Cal. 3d 721 (Cal. 1982)