It is important for landlords to know and understand basic rules of contract interpretation especially when a landlord finds him/her/itself in an eviction trial wherein a rental agreement or provisions thereof, are being challenged by a tenant or scrutinized by a Court. Under California law, the same rules applicable to the interpretation of contracts are also applied to the interpretation of a written rental agreement. See Medico-Dental Bldg. Co. of Los Angeles v. Horton & Converse (1942) 21 Cal. 2d 411, 418. The rules for contract interpretation have been codified and can be found in our Civil Code §§ 1635 to 1662. Thus, a contract “must receive such an interpretation as will make it lawful, operative, definite, reasonable, and capable of being carried into effect, if it can be done without violating the intention of the parties.” Cal. Civ. Code § 1643. As follows, words are going to be given their ordinary and popular sense, unless used by the parties in a technical sense, or a special meaning is given to them by usage for example. Landlords also must keep in mind that ambiguities will be construed against the drafter of the agreement (i.e., interpreted against the landlord), so ambiguous or unclear terms should be cleared up or re-drafted to avoid problems if and when the contract is scrutinized by a Court. See Cal. Civ. Code § 1654 (“In cases of uncertainty not removed by the preceding rules, the language of a contract should be interpreted most strongly against the party who caused the uncertainty to exist.”) Therefore, a landlord is best served with a clear and concise rental agreement defining the scope and extent of the relationship with the tenant and accounting for all reasonable contingencies that may arise during the tenancy.