Real Property Law
California Case Summary Update: June 2025 Real Property Case Summaries
June 2025
By Monty A. McIntyre, Esq.
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 by providing 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 is the case summary from last month:
CALIFORNIA COURTS OF APPEAL
Land Use
Old Golden Oaks v. County of Amador (2025) _ Cal.App.5th _ , 2025 WL 1540531: The Court of Appeal reversed in part, and sustained in part, the trial court’s order sustaining defendant’s demurrer, without leave to amend, to a petition for writ of mandate seeking to reverse defendant’s denials of an encroachment permit and a grading permit in connection with a housing development project. Plaintiffs alleged that defendant violated the Permit Streamlining Act (Gov. Code, § 65920 et seq.) by requesting information not included in the submittal checklists for both permits. The Court of Appeal agreed with plaintiff that the catch-all provision in defendant’s encroachment permit submittal checklist violated the Permit Streamlining Act because it did not specify in detail the information required for a development project application, and reversed the trial court on this issue. However, defendant could condition the completeness of the grading permit application on the additional environmental information because the submittal checklist for the grading permit informed plaintiff that its project must comply with California Environmental Quality Act (Pub. Resources Code, § 21000 et seq.). (C.A. 3rd, May 30, 2025.)