Real Property Law

Real Property Case Summary Updates

January 2020

image of Monty McIntyre

By Monty McIntyre

California Case Summaries™ (https://californiacasesummaries.mykajabi.com) Monty A. McIntyre, Esq. is the publisher of California Case Summaries™. Monty has been 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) in ADR’s offices in San Diego, Irvine, and Los Angeles. California Case Summaries™provides short summaries, organized by legal topic, of every new published civil and family law case so California lawyers can easily and affordably keep up with the new case law in their practice areas. Monthly, quarterly and annual subscriptions are available.  

CALIFORNIA COURTS OF APPEAL

Environment

Covington v. Great Basin Unified Air Pollution Control Dist. (2019) _ Cal.App.5th _ , 2019 WL 7169140: In a California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) challenge to the approval of a geothermal power plant to be located on federal land in Mono County, the Court of Appeal ruled that the Great Basin Unified Air Pollution Control District (District) was the proper lead agency to undertake preparation of an environmental impact report, and the permit limiting the daily Reactive Organic Gas (ROG) emissions was sufficient evidence of the amount of the emissions. However, the Court of Appeal ruled the District had not adequately analyzed whether additional mitigation measures proposed by petitioners were feasible to limit ROG emissions and therefore reversed the part of the trial court’s judgment approving the District’s consideration of the proposed mitigation measures. (C.A. 3rd, filed November 26, 2019, published December 23, 2019.) 

Holden v. City of San Diego
(2019) _ Cal.App.5th _ , 2019 WL 6835179: The Court of Appeal affirmed the trial court’s denial of a writ petition challenging respondent’s decision to grant a California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA; Public Resources Code, section 21000 et seq.) exemption for a residential development project proposed in the North Park area of respondent and approve the project. Respondent properly found the project was exempt from CEQA under the categorical exemption for infill development. Respondent did not err in finding that the project was consistent with the General Plan’s density designations and recommendations and, based thereon, approving the project. The trial court did not err in denying the petition for writ of mandate. (C.A. 4th, December 13, 2019.)

Real Property

McDermott Ranch v. Connolly Ranch (2019) _ Cal.App.5th _ , 2019 WL 6873444: The Court of Appeal affirmed a judgment for defendant/cross-complainant, following a bench trial, on its cross-complaint to quiet title. The dispute arose from a 1958 land transaction between the predecessor property owners. Connolly Ranch (Connolly) claimed its parcel was 165 acres. McDermott Ranch (McDermott) claimed the Connolly parcel was only 107 acres. The trial court properly awarded Connolly the disputed 58 acres under the agreed boundary doctrine, in part based on testimony from Mark Connolly regarding statements made by his father Robert Connolly (Robert) about the background and intent of the parties when entering into the 1958 transaction. Robert had negotiated the deal on behalf of his mother Ann Connolly, who was a predecessor in interest to Connolly. The trial court properly ruled that Robert’s statements were not hearsay under Evidence Code 1323. It also properly awarded Connolly attorney fees after finding that McDermott had unjustifiably failed to admit certain requests for admission. (C.A. 3rd, December 17, 2019.)

Monty just published California Case Summaries: Annual 2019 with his succinct summaries, organized by legal topic, of the 570 new California civil and family law casespublished in 2019. There is no other publication like it! It costs only $499.99 per attorney and I also offer multi-user options for law firms. California Case Summaries: Annual 2019™ is the easy, cost-effective way that California lawyers keep up with the new California case law in their practice areas. Subscribers get great ideas for working up their cases, great ideas for arguments to make in motions and during trial, and they impress judges, legal colleagues and clients with their knowledge of the new case law. This helps them get better results and grow their law practices.

Subscribe today to California Case Summaries: Annual 2019 and get 10% off the price. Just click here and enter CCS20 in the Coupon Code area. 

Forgot Password

Enter the email associated with you account. You will then receive a link in your inbox to reset your password.

Personal Information

Select Section(s)

CLA Membership is $95 and includes one section. Additional sections are $95 each.

Payment