California Case Summaries™ (https://cacasesummaries.com)
Monty A. McIntyre, Esq. is the publisher of California Case Summaries™ which provides short summaries, organized by legal topic, of every new published civil and family law case helping California lawyers easily master the new case law in their practice areas, get better results and referrals, and grow their law practice. Monthly, quarterly and annual subscriptions are available. Annual Practice Area subscriptions are also available in the areas of Employment, Family Law, Real Property and Torts. Monty hasbeen a California civil trial lawyer since 1980, a member of ABOTA since 1995, and currently works as a full-time mediator, arbitrator and referee with ADR Services, Inc. (ADR) conducing Zoom hearings throughout California. (https://www.adrservices.com/neutrals/mcintyre-monty/)
Please let your Real Property Law Section members know that my annual publications California Case Summaries Annual – Real Property 2020 ™ (with summaries of every new Arbitration, Attorney Fees, Civil Code, Civil Procedure, Environment, Evidence, Government, Landlord & Tenant, Real Property & Settlement case published in 2020), and California Case Summaries Annual 2020™ (with summaries of every civil case published in 2020) are now available at https://cacasesummaries.com.
CALIFORNIA COURTS OF APPEAL
Newtown Preservation Society v. County of El Dorado (2021) _ Cal.App.5th _ , 2021 WL 2451269: The Court of Appeal affirmed the trial court’s order denying a petition for writ of mandate challenging respondent’s adoption of a mitigated negative declaration regarding a project to replace an existing bridge. The Court of Appeal held that petitioners’ framing of the fair argument test in terms of the project having “potentially significant impacts on resident safety and emergency evacuation” was erroneous. The test instead was whether the record contained substantial evidence that the project may have a significant effect on the environment or may exacerbate existing environmental hazards. The Court of Appeal concluded that petitioners failed to carry their burden of showing substantial evidence supported a fair argument of significant environmental impact in that regard. The Court of Appeal also concluded that respondent did not impermissibly defer mitigation of potential impacts. (C.A. 3d, June 16, 2021.)
Yanez v. Vasquez (2021) _ Cal.App.5th Supp. _ , 2021 WL 2637270: The Appellate Department of the Los Angeles Superior Court affirmed the trial court’s order granting defendant’s motion for summary judgment in an unlawful detainer action. The Appellate Department held that although defendant gave notice that fell short by one day (Code of Civil Procedure section 1170.7 and 1013(c)), plaintiff waived the issue and appellate relief on that basis was unwarranted due to the dearth of any resulting prejudice to plaintiff. On the merits, the Appellate Department ruled that the absence of a certificate of occupancy (due to an illegally converted garage) rendered the lease agreement void and, for that reason, an unlawful detainer action could not be based on defendant’s failure to comply with its provisions.(Appellate Department, Los Angeles Superior Court, filed April 22, 2021, published June 25, 2021.)
County of Sacramento v. Rawat (2021) _ Cal.App.5th _ , 2021 WL 2514053: The Court of Appeal affirmed the trial court’s order approving the receiver’s (who had been appointed by the trial court under Health and Safety Code section 17980.7 to take control of and rehabilitate two properties) final account and report and discharging the receiver. The Court of Appeal ruled the dismissal of plaintiff’s complaint did not deprive the trial court of jurisdiction to settle the receiver’s final account and discharge the receiver and it rejected the pro per defendant’s other claims. (C.A. 3rd, filed May 20, 2021, published June 18, 2021.)