What is the limitation of section 3135 of the California Code of Civil Procedure on residential units?

Appellants also contend without supporting argument that the rule of ejusdem generis, codified in section 3534, requires the limitation of section 3135 to residential units and other structures appurtenant thereto. Section 3534 provides that "[p]articular expressions qualify those which are general." Though a rule of statutory construction, it is " 'by no means a rule of universal application.... When it can be seen that the particular word ... was inserted, not to give a coloring to the general word, but for a distinct object, and when, to carry out the purpose of the statute, the general word ought to govern, it is a mistake to allow the ejusdem generis rule to pervert the construction.' " (County of Sacramento v. City of Sacramento (1946) 75 Cal.App.2d 436, 443-444, 171 P.2d 477, quoting Hunt v. Manning (1914) 24 Cal.App. 44, 48, 140 P. 39.) We are not convinced by appellants that section 3534 has any application to the question before us.

[16 Cal.App.4th 1042]

(b) Section 3135 was correctly applied to the facts of this case by the trial court

Appellants begin this portion of their challenge to the judgment by taking the position that section 3135 is an exception to the general rule of section 3134. Citing Barnes v. Chamberlain (1983) 147 Cal.App.3d 762, 767, 195 Cal.Rptr. 417, they contend that it was respondent's burden to establish that the exception applied.