Legal Question in Real Estate Law in California

I'm not quite sure I understand the question. I guess there are two "requirements" for being a landlord: (1) You have the current right to possess certain real property; and (2) you give your right of possession to someone else in exchange for a valuable consideration. Usually, the landlord is also the owner of the property, but that is not essential; all that's really required is that he currently has the right of possession. For example, a tenant who subleases part of his or her leased property becomes a landlord (or landlady) with respect to the subtenant. Usually the valuable consideration is money, called "rent," but it could be anything else. If there is no consideration, the person getting possession is probably a guest, not a tenant, and the person surrendering possession is a host, not a landlord.

So, time of acquisition of the property seems irrelevant to the question as to whether he is a landlord or not. He could have inherited the property at age one, or the two of you could have acquired the property as your community property yesterday.

If someone tries to rent out property where he or she does not have the right to be in possession, however, the person is a fraud or scamster, not a landlord. Accepting rent for property where you have no rights is a crime called "rent skimming."