Real Property Law
California Case Summary Update: November 2025 Real Property Case Summaries
November 2025
Monty A. McIntyre, Esq.
Helping Attorneys Get Excellent Results
Publisher: California Case Summaries™: Know More. Win More.
Mediator at ADR Services, Inc.: Business, employment, insurance, probate, real property and torts cases.
To schedule, contact one of Monty’s case managers Haward Cho, haward@adrservices.com, (213) 683-1600, or Rachael Boughan, rboughan@adrservices.com, (619) 233-1323.
Trial Mentoring™: Trial training and preparation.
Trial Alchemy™: Learn from Civil Jury Trial Experts. Available on Spotify, Apple Podcasts and YouTube.
California Case Summaries™: California attorneys can win more cases by always knowing the new published civil in their practice areas. California Case Summaries™ makes this easy with one-paragraph case summaries, organized by legal topic, of every new civil case published by California courts in monthly issues, quarterly issues, annual issues, or all three. Individual Attorney and Law Firm Unlimited (lets the firm send summaries to every lawyer) subscriptions are available. To subscribe, click here.
Here are the case summaries from last month:
CALIFORNIA COURTS OF APPEAL
Land Use
Move Eden Housing v. City of Livermore (2025) _ Cal.App.5th _ , 2025 WL 2837353: The Court of Appeal reversed the trial court’s order compelling defendant to comply with a writ of mandate that required defendant to process a referendum challenging a 2022 resolution that approved a development agreement between defendant and real party in interest Eden Housing, Inc. (Eden Housing) for development of affordable workforce housing in downtown Livermore. The trial court ruled that defendant violated Elections Code section 9241 by adopting a 2024 resolution that reaffirmed a prior affordable housing development agreement after repealing an earlier version following a successful referendum, finding the new resolution was not “essentially different” from the repealed one. The Court of Appeal disagreed, concluding that section 9241 did not prohibit defendant’s action because the 2024 resolution involved only administrative acts implementing previously approved legislative decisions, not legislative acts subject to the referendum power. (C.A. 1st, October 7, 2025.)
New Commune DTLA LLC et al. v. City Redondo Beach et al. (2025) _ Cal.App.5th _ , 2025 WL 2886322: The Court of Appeal reversed the trial court’s denial of a petition for writ of mandate challenging defendant’s housing element adopted under the state Housing Element Law (Housing Element Law; Government Code sections 65580 to 65589.11). The trial court ruled that defendant’s housing element complied with the Housing Element Law despite plaintiffs’ claims that it improperly relied on a zoning “overlay” permitting residential use on commercial and industrial land. The Court of Appeal disagreed, concluding that defendant’s overlay violated Government Code section 65583.2(h)(2) because it failed to impose mandatory minimum residential densities and allowed development without any housing, and that defendant failed to establish that one of the sites identified in the housing element, the Inglewood Avenue site currently occupied by a Vons supermarket, was properly identified as a developable site. (C.A. 2nd, October 10, 2025.)
Real Property
Kim v. New Life Oasis Church (2025) _ Cal.App.5th _ , 2025 WL 3012393: The Court of Appeal affirmed in part and reversed in part the trial court’s order granting defendant’s motion for judgment on the pleadings as to plaintiff Steven Kim’s complaint alleging that his deed of trust, expunged in an earlier action, was valid and not expunged, and its judgment following a bench trial, in favor cross-complainant New Life and Bank of Hope awarding it $277,821.90 in damages and holding that cross-defendant Steven Kim’s recording of a lis pendens was slander of title and abuse of process. The Court of Appeal affirmed the issue preclusion ruling, but it concluded that the litigation privilege protected cross-defendant Kim’s lis pendens and it reversed the cross-complaint judgment and remanded for entry of judgment for Kim on the cross-claims. (C.A. 2nd, October 28, 2025.)
******
Trial Alchemy™ by Monty A. McIntyre, Esq.
In this monthly podcast Monty interviews outstanding plaintiff and defendant civil trial lawyers, and civil trial judges, who are members of the American Board of Trial Advocates. The podcast is a great way for civil trial lawyers, whether they’ve tried no cases or many cases, to learn from civil jury trial experts:
To listen to the podcast on Spotify, click here.
To listen to the podcast on Apple Podcasts, click here.
To watch and listen to the podcast on YouTube, click here.