@Michael Haas I'm guessing so because even the landlord tenant act says "You may have heard that it is unlawful to evict someone in the winter but this is not true."

Read CAA's letter opposing AB 828 here.This bill denies equal justice to housing providers by:Forcing landlords to reduce rents by 25% even if a tenant cannot demonstrate a hardship or need.Allowing judges and the court system to set rents and change the rental agreements already in place.Assuming every tenant is facing a hardship related to COVID-19 and must be compensated for this hardship.Protecting nuisance tenants as it does not require tenants to answer an unlawful detainer complaintMandating that rental property owners demonstrate an economic hardship to collect the contracted rent.AB 828 is an unfair attempt to allow the government and the courts to give reduced rent to all tenants even if they have face no economic hardship, and it provides safeguards for landlords.Contact your state legislator and ask him or her to VOTE NO on AB 828.It's insane.

Unlawful evictions will be dismissed with prejudice and may even subject the landlord to damages. 

Do not under any circumstances meet or go to that place.  100% these are the type of people that will say you did something inappropriate (assault, unlawful entry whatever) just to get you on your heels2. 

May be we should have non-profits or pro-bono attorneys representing mentally challenged and elderly individuals who were unfairly and unlawfully taken advantage of.

It is the problem tenants and unlawful detainers that concern me.)

I have served my Tenant with an unlawful detainer and complaint last Friday.

Her mother (who is an attorney) told me that she still holds the right as a holdover tenant and that I need to change my plans or they can consider it unlawful trespass.I understand the idea behind a holdover tenant but my question here is, if a tenant signs a new lease with another landlord (and have not made a payment for the new month) are they still considered a holdover tenant with the previous apartment?

It's called Unlawful Detainer. 

Therefore, to deny housing based on a fulfilled obligation is unlawful.