Does the forfeiture clause render the retaliatory eviction defense applicable?

We do not decide whether the forfeiture clause rendered the retaliatory eviction defense inapplicable. Even assuming the court erred in determining retaliatory eviction was not a valid defense, reversal is unwarranted due to defendant's failure to establish he was prejudiced by the error. Prejudice is not presumed, and the burden is on the appealing party to demonstrate that a miscarriage of justice has occurred. [Citation.] To establish prejudice, an appellant must show a reasonable probability exists that, in the absence of the error, he or she would have obtained a more favorable result. [Citation.] (People ex rel. City of Santa Monica v. Gabriel (2010) 186 Cal.App.4th 882, 887, 112 Cal.Rptr.3d 574.)

Defendant had the burden to prove the retaliation defense at trial, and thus had

[193 Cal.Rptr.3d 530]