57 Post Street, Suite 804, San Francisco, CA 94104
Available 24/7
57 Post Street, Suite 804, San Francisco, CA 94104
CONFIDENTIAL.
NO OBLIGATION.
San Francisco Wrongful Eviction Attorney
Wrongfully Evicted in San Francisco?
Has your landlord evicted you wrongfully, you may have legal options.
Start with a FREE, confidential consultation.
FREE
CONSULTATIONS
20+
YEARS OF EXPERIENCE
RESULTS
PROVEN TRACK RECORD
4.8 STAR RATED ON GOOGLE
It often starts with a notice, a threat, or a “reason” that doesn’t add up
Do any of these
sound familar?
• Owner / Relative Move-In that appears false or financially motivated
• Retaliation after you requested repairs or reported conditions
• “Told to leave” pressure tactics or interference with your quiet enjoyment
• Harassment, intimidation, or buyout pressure
• Notices that are improper, rushed, or legally defective
• Illegal/unpermitted unit issues used to force you out
YOU MAY BE ENTITLED TO COMPENSATION
WHAT YOU MAY BE ABLE TO RECOVER:
The Value of the Loss of your Home
If you were wrongfully forced out of your rental, you may be entitled to compensation for the financial impact of losing your home.
Emotional Distress Damages
Anxiety, embarrassment, loss of sleep, strain on family relationships, and disruption to children’s schooling are just a few of the emotional impacts that may result.
Punitive Damages
If a landlord’s conduct was particularly reckless, malicious, or intentional, a court may award punitive damages. Less common, but they may apply in especially serious cases.
YOU MAY BE ENTITLED TO COMPENSATION
WHAT YOU MAY BE ABLE TO RECOVER:
The Value of the Loss of your Home
If you were wrongfully forced out of your rental, you may be entitled to compensation for the financial impact of losing your home.
Emotional Distress Damages
Anxiety, embarrassment, loss of sleep, strain on family relationships, and disruption to children’s schooling are just a few of the emotional impacts that may result.
Punitive Damages
If a landlord’s conduct was particularly reckless, malicious, or intentional, a court may award punitive damages. Less common, but they may apply in especially serious cases.
CALL TENANT ATTORNEY: MARK HOOSHMAND
415-532-3165
Results
Highest Wrongful Eviction Settlement in California History
Other Success for Tenants
$2,600,000 Settlement of False Owner Move in Eviction
(San Francisco Superior Court)
$2,100,000 Settlement of False Owner Move in Eviction
(San Francisco Superior Court)
$510,000 Settlement of Owner Move-In Eviction Case
(San Francisco Superior Court)
WHY TENANTS CHOOSE
HOOSHMAND LAW GROUP
When your housing is on the line, you want a firm that’s ready to take the case as far as it needs to go.
• Proven track record in tenant litigation
• Trial-ready approach that's built to stand up to landlords and insurers
• Resources to pursue complex cases
• Known in the community and by opposing counsel
• Tenant-focused practice serving San Francisco and the Bay Area
Bottom line:
You deserve a team that treats your home like the high-stakes issue it is.
WHY TENANTS CHOOSE
HOOSHMAND LAW GROUP
When your housing is on the line, you want a firm that’s ready to take the case as far as it needs to go.
• Proven track record in tenant litigation
• Trial-ready approach that's built to stand up to landlords and insurers
• Resources to pursue complex cases
• Known in the community and by opposing counsel
• Tenant-focused practice serving San Francisco and the Bay Area
Bottom line:
You deserve a team that treats your home like the high-stakes issue it is.
Schedule your free consultation
Speak with a Tenant Attorney Today
If you believe your eviction was wrongful, or you’re being pressured out... don’t wait.
RECENT SUCCESSFUL CASES
R v NR
ASSAULT & BREACH
NR was alleged to have assaulted his common law partner. Several months later he was alleged to have assaulted her again, this time in breach of a court order. Consequently, NR was charged with multiple assault and court order breach offences. NR strongly denied the allegations. He plead not guilty and trial dates were set.
Before the first trial date, Matt Browne made multiple disclosure requests. The sought disclosure would bear on the complainant’s credibility. Matt had numerous discussions with the Crown about the disclosure. Through the discussions the Crown agreed to withdraw the charges that NR was facing.
R v OB
ASSAULT
Following a Christmas party, OB’s partner called the police alleging that OB assaulted her and prevented her from leaving the family home. The police arrested OB and charged him with assault causing bodily harm and forcible confinement.
After meeting with OB and reviewing disclosure Matt Browne contacted the Crown to discuss OB’s matter. Matt Browne highlighted potential credibility and witness participation issues should a trial occur. The Crown agreed; OB entered into a common law peace bond and the charges against him were withdrawn.
R v NR
BREACH COURT ORDER
When SS contacted Matt Browne he was charged with two breaches of a Conditional Sentence Order (CSO) and two breaches of a court order. CSO breaches may result in an individual spending the balance of their sentence in jail.
The Crown alleged that SS committed multiple curfew breaches. Matt Browne explained to the Crown that SS was assisting his mother during one of the breaches. Matt also noted some challenges the Crown would have with establishing the other breach allegations.
The Crown agreed. Three of the charges were dropped and SS plead guilty to a single CSO breach and received a 10 day extension of his CSO as a sentence.
R v CM
DRUG OFFENCES
Bike cops were responding to reports of drug trafficking in downtown Calgary. When they arrived at the scene of the complaint, the police found CM engaging in activity consistent with drug trafficking.
CM was arrested. A search of CM incident to arrest yielded several types of drugs along with cash. CM was charged with possession for the purpose of trafficking and possession of the proceeds of crime.
After reviewing disclosure, Matt Browne noted a significant issue with the search of CM. The issue could form the basis for an application to exclude the drugs and cash from the trial under section 8 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
Matt informed the Crown of the issues the with search. The Crown reviewed disclosure in light of Matt’s comments. They then advised Matt that the charges against CM would be withdrawn.
Disclaimer: All results of cases handled by the lawyer are not provided. Every case is different, and each client’s case must be evaluated and handled on its own merits.
57 Post Street, Suite 804, San Francisco, CA 94104
57 Post Street, Suite 804, San Francisco, CA 94104
The information on this website is for general informational purposes only and may not reflect current law in your jurisdiction. It is not legal advice from Hooshmand Law Group and should not replace consultation with a licensed lawyer. Do not act or refrain from acting based on this information without seeking professional legal advice specific to your situation.
© 2026 HOOSHMAND LAW GROUP. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. | MARKETING BY: ACED DIGITAL