California Civil Code Section 1951.2: Damages, Mitigation, and Deadlines

When a tenant breaks a lease in California, Civil Code Section 1951.2 lets the landlord recover four things: unpaid rent through the termination date, rent lost between termination and the court’s judgment, future rent that would have come in after judgment through the end of the lease term, and any other losses tied directly to the breach. Each category has its own rules, and the future-rent piece in particular comes with conditions that many landlords miss.¹

When the Statute Applies

Section 1951.2 comes into play when a tenant’s right to occupy the property ends because of the tenant’s own breach. That usually means unpaid rent, a violation of a material lease term, or outright abandonment. Once the landlord terminates possession for breach, the claim stops being about monthly rent under a lease and becomes a breach-of-contract claim for provable damages.¹

That distinction matters. The landlord can no longer simply demand “the rest of the rent.” They have to calculate actual losses, credit what the property could have earned on re-rental, and in some cases discount future amounts to present value. The statute is built to make the landlord whole without producing a windfall.

The Four Categories of Recoverable Damages

Section 1951.2 sorts recoverable damages into four buckets, each covering a different time period or type of loss.

Unpaid rent through the termination date. This is any rent the tenant owed but didn’t pay up to the day the lease was officially terminated. It’s usually the least contested piece of a claim.
Lost rent from termination to judgment. This is the rent the landlord would have collected between the termination date and the day the court issues its award, reduced by whatever the tenant proves the landlord could have earned by re-renting with reasonable effort.
Future rent after judgment. This is the rent the landlord would have collected from the judgment date through the end of the original lease term, again reduced by any amount the tenant proves could have been avoided through re-renting. Additional conditions apply, covered below.
Other losses from the breach. This picks up any other cost the landlord can trace directly to the tenant’s failure to perform: cleaning, repairs beyond normal wear, advertising, broker fees, and similar reletting expenses.

The first, second, and fourth categories are calculated at face value, with interest at the rate specified in the lease or the default legal rate if the lease is silent.¹

How Future Rent Is Calculated

Future rent gets special treatment because the landlord is receiving a lump sum today for money that would have arrived over months or years. Section 1951.2 requires courts to discount that future stream to its present value using the discount rate of the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco plus one percentage point.¹ As of early 2026 the base rate sits at 3.75%, putting the statutory discount rate at 4.75%.²

The discount matters most on long leases. If a tenant breaks a five-year commercial lease with three years remaining, the gap between face value and discounted value can run to tens of thousands of dollars. On a residential lease with only a few months left, it barely moves the total.

Future rent also comes with a gatekeeping requirement. A landlord can recover it only if one of two conditions is met: the lease itself contains a provision authorizing this type of recovery, or the landlord actually re-rented the property before trial and can prove the re-renting efforts were reasonable and made in good faith.¹ If neither is true, the other three categories are still available, but future rent falls out entirely. A lease that’s silent on post-judgment damages can quietly cost the landlord a significant chunk of the claim.

A landlord who wants to avoid the discounting calculation can instead sue periodically as each month’s rent comes due. That works in theory. In practice, filing multiple actions rarely makes sense for a residential lease.

The Duty to Mitigate

The mitigation requirement is written into the damage formula. Both the second and third categories subtract whatever rental income the tenant proves the landlord could have avoided losing by re-renting.¹ A landlord who leaves a unit sitting empty and does nothing cannot then bill the former tenant for the full remaining rent.

Reasonable mitigation looks like any normal vacancy: advertise promptly, show the unit to interested renters, and price it at fair market rent. Listing at an inflated price to deter applicants, or not listing at all, hands the tenant a strong argument to reduce the damages owed.

The burden of proof sits on the tenant. Arguing that the landlord “should have tried harder” isn’t enough. The tenant has to show, with specifics, that a replacement tenant was available at a certain rent and that the landlord unreasonably failed to secure them. If the tenant proves the unit could have rented for $2,000 a month starting two months after they left, that $2,000 comes off the claim for every month the replacement would have covered.

Making mitigation efforts doesn’t waive the damage claim. Some landlords hesitate to re-rent, worried it signals they’ve “accepted” the breach. The statute protects the landlord’s right to pursue damages while simultaneously requiring them to minimize the loss.

Property Damage and Reletting Costs

The fourth category most often covers the cost of putting the unit back into rentable shape. Not every repair qualifies. California draws a firm line between damage the tenant caused and normal wear and tear from ordinary use.

Faded paint, minor wall scuffs, light carpet wear from foot traffic, and small nail holes from hanging pictures are wear. Those cannot be charged to a departing tenant. Damage beyond ordinary use is recoverable: holes punched in walls, stained or torn carpet, broken fixtures, pet damage such as scratched doors or urine-soaked flooring, unauthorized modifications, and excessive filth requiring professional cleaning.

Reletting expenses fall in the same category. Advertising costs, broker fees, and other expenses the landlord incurs to find a replacement tenant are recoverable as damages proximately caused by the breach, because they wouldn’t have existed if the tenant had finished the lease term.

How the Security Deposit Fits In

A landlord holding a security deposit will typically apply it against the tenant’s outstanding obligations before calculating the balance owed. Under Civil Code Section 1950.5, the deposit can be used for unpaid rent, repairs for damage beyond normal wear and tear, and cleaning necessary to restore the unit to its move-in condition.³

Since July 2024, California has capped security deposits at one month’s rent for most landlords. Small landlords, defined as natural persons or all-member LLCs who own no more than two rental properties totaling four or fewer units, can collect up to two months’ rent.³ With deposits capped this low, they rarely cover the full damages from a broken long-term lease. The deposit reduces the balance; the landlord can still sue under Section 1951.2 for everything it doesn’t cover.

Keeping the Lease Alive Instead

Section 1951.2 isn’t the only route. Under Civil Code Section 1951.4, a landlord can choose not to terminate the lease and instead keep it in effect, collecting rent as each installment comes due, even if the tenant has abandoned the property.⁴ This avoids both the discounting calculation and the gatekeeping conditions on future rent.

The catch: this remedy is available only if the lease gives the tenant the right to sublet or assign, even if that right is subject to the landlord’s reasonable approval.⁵ A lease that flatly prohibits subletting shuts off 1951.4 and forces the landlord back to 1951.2.

Attorney Fees

California follows the general American rule that each side pays their own attorney unless a contract or statute says otherwise. Most written leases include an attorney-fee clause. Under Civil Code Section 1717, any one-sided attorney-fee provision in a contract becomes automatically reciprocal: if the lease lets the landlord recover legal costs from the tenant, the tenant can recover from the landlord too. The prevailing party collects.

That creates real stakes on both sides. A landlord who files a weak claim risks paying the tenant’s fees if the tenant wins. A tenant who contests a well-documented claim faces the mirror risk. When a fee-shifting clause is in play, the cost of being wrong roughly doubles.

Filing Deadline

A landlord has four years from the date of the breach to file a lawsuit on a written lease, under Code of Civil Procedure Section 337, which sets the general four-year statute of limitations for actions on written contracts.⁶ For an oral rental agreement, the limitations period is two years.

Four years sounds generous, but delay works against landlords. The longer a unit sits empty without documented mitigation efforts, the harder it becomes to prove reasonable action. The strongest claims are filed after the landlord has re-rented the unit at the best available price and can show exactly what the breach cost.

1
California Legislative Information. California Civil Code 1951.2
2
Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System. Discount Rate Minutes – January 2026
3
California Legislative Information. California Civil Code 1950.5
4
California Department of Real Estate. Landlord and Tenant
5
California Legislative Information. California Civil Code 1951.4
6
California Legislative Information. California Code of Civil Procedure 337