Real Property Law
CALIFORNIA CASE SUMMARY UPDATE: March 2025 Real Property Case Summaries
March 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 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 are the case summaries from last month:
CALIFORNIA COURTS OF APPEAL
Inverse Condemnation
Shehyn v. Ventura County Public Works Agency et al. (2025) _ Cal.App.5th _, 2025 WL 556192: The Court of Appeal reversed the trial court’s judgment for defendant after it sustained defendant’s demurrer, without leave to amend, to plaintiff’s complaint alleging inverse condemnation. Plaintiff alleged that sediment from defendant’s water delivery system permanently damaged the pipes used to irrigate his 20-acre commercial avocado orchard with approximately 2000 mature avocado trees. The trial court concluded that plaintiff had failed to state a cause of action for inverse condemnation because he “invited” defendant’s water onto his property. The Court of Appeal disagreed, concluding that plaintiff alleged a cause of action for inverse condemnation. Plaintiff alleged that a public improvement, defendant’s water delivery system, working as it was deliberately designed, constructed and maintained, delivered an amount of sediment that was vastly and grossly disproportionally greater than delivered to other properties, and this sediment damaged plaintiff’s irrigation system. The Court of Appeal interpreted these allegations to be plaintiff seeking compensation for bearing a disproportionate amount of the externalized costs of a public improvement resulting from an inherent risk presented by the deliberate design, construction, or maintenance of the public improvement, and this interpretation supported a claim for inverse condemnation. (C.A. 2nd, February 20, 2025.)
Landlord-Tenant
Heffesse v. Guevara (2025) _ Cal.App.5th _, 2025 WL 547001: The Appellate Division of the Los Angeles Superior Court affirmed the trial court’s order granting defendant’s oral motion for judgment on the pleadings in an unlawful detainer action. The trial court properly granted the motion concluding that the three day notice was improper because the complaint alleged the monthly rental rate was $1,550 but the three day notice demanded payments in the amount of $1,554.44 per month. The notice to pay rent or quit overstated the amount of rent due by including Systematic Code Enforcement Program fees of $4 per month. (C.A. Appellate Division of the Los Angeles Superior Court, filed January 24, 2024, published February 19, 2025.)