Legal Question in Real Estate Law in California

If you have moved out completely, including taking your possessions and surrendering the keys, there is no longer an unlawful detainer and the case cannot proceed as such if you file an answer raising those facts as a defense. Here is a quotation from the Miller & Starr treatise on California Real Property Law:

"The action cannot be prosecuted as an unlawful detainer when the tenant abandons. The primary objective of an unlawful detainer proceeding is to recover possession of the leased premises. Therefore, when the tenant relinquishes possession after service of the complaint but prior to the trial (or prior to judgment if there is no trial), the landlord cannot proceed to trial in an action for unlawful detainer[FN1] and the case becomes an ordinary civil action for damages.[FN2]

"Case Example: A tenant sublet the premises, and, upon the tenant's default in the payment of rent, the landlord served a three-day notice on the tenant, but not on the subtenant. The tenant relinquished possession by informing the subtenant that he was no longer their sublessor, and he notified the landlord that he abandoned the premises. The court held that, since notice was not served on the subtenants and the tenant had relinquished his right to possession, the landlord could not maintain an action for unlawful detainer and that, therefore, he could not recover a judgment for the delinquent rent in that action. The landlord must file a new action for breach of contract.[FN3]

"The tenant must file an answer. Even though possession is no longer in issue, the tenant's time to answer the complaint remains the same as that in an unlawful detainer proceeding.[FN4] The tenant must answer the complaint within the five days for an unlawful detainer summons unless the landlord amends the complaint.[FN5] If the tenant fails to file an answer within the five days, the matter can proceed under the original complaint and the landlord can take the default of the defendant after the five days have expired even though the tenant has relinquished possession.[FN6]

"Possession must be "delivered." The requirement that possession be "delivered" to the landlord would require that the tenant not be in possession in person, have no property on the premises, and show an intent not to assert any right to occupy the property.[FN7]

Case Example: The tenant admitted in his answer to the unlawful detainer complaint that he was in possession of the premises, but, prior to the date of trial, he vacated the premises and gave the keys to the landlord's attorney. On the morning of the trial, he requested a continuance in order to prepare for and prosecute an affirmative defense that the landlord had failed to repair and maintain the premises. The court held that, upon the tenant's vacating the premises, even though immediately prior to trial, and despite his admissions in his answer, the action immediately was transformed into an ordinary civil action for damages. In such cases, the summary nature of the proceeding and the right to calendar preference are lost, and the tenant is then entitled to present affirmative defenses not otherwise available in unlawful detainer proceedings, and he is entitled to a continuance in order to prepare for these defenses.[FN8]

"Case Example: The landlord fired his resident manager and then served a notice requiring him to vacate the premises or pay rent. When the manager failed to pay rent or to vacate, the landlord commenced an unlawful detainer proceeding. The former manager then vacated the premises. The court held that when the landlord gave the notice to the former manager his occupancy was converted from a tenancy at sufferance to a periodic tenancy, and, therefore, the unlawful detainer proceeding could not be commenced until after the proper notices were served and the required period had expired. When the former manager vacated, the unlawful detainer action was converted into an ordinary action for damages, both past and prospective (if there is an unexpired lease term). If the landlord seeks prospective damages or any other damages not recoverable in an unlawful detainer action, either the complaint must be amended to claim these damages and eliminate possession as an issue, or a separate action must be filed to collect the prospective damages. However, these procedures only apply when the action is properly commenced originally as an unlawful detainer proceeding; since the proper notices were not given by the landlord in this case, these rules do not apply. In this case, the matter should have been removed from the civil calendar, the complaint amended as an ordinary civil action for damages, and the matter thereafter treated as an ordinary civil action.[FN9]"

The [FNxx} items are footnote references in the quoted material, generally case or statutory citations. Contact me directly if you need them.

Wow, what a long winded answer that doesn't touch on your question. Mr. Whipple is right that the case would be converted to a regular calendar case rather than a UD once you surrender posession and plead that. As the long quote indicates, howver, that is not the end of the case. Eventually there will be a hearing (and it will be on the UD trial date unless you go to court and plead and prove you surrendered the premises). If you do not show up at that hearing the landlord will get a money judgment against you and then can use any legal method to enforce it, including liens and wage garnishments.