-Easements-
Where federal government severed property, conveyed part to defendants without expressly reserving a right of access to remaining landlocked portion, and then conveyed remaining portion to plaintiff, circumstances failed to support an easement by necessity.
     Murphy v. Burch  - filed April 27, 2009
     Cite as 2009 SOS 2332
     Full text

Back to Top

-Easements-
Trial court had a legal and factual basis to find an equitable easement along a roadway over plaintiffs’ property where that roadway was the only possible access way to the defendants' parcels, an alternative access could not be developed, and plaintiffs would not be deprived of the full use of their property. Trial court did not err in failing to award damages for defendants' use of roadway across plaintiffs’ property where such use did not prevent plaintiffs from fully developing parcel. Trial court’s grant of a 66-foot-wide easement was error in absence of evidence that narrower right-of-way would be insufficient to ensure access.
     Linthicum v. Butterfield - April 2, 2009, Second District, Div. Six
     Cite as 2009 SOS 1959
     Full text

Back to Top

-Premises Liability-
Because building owner owed plaintiff injured in an elevator accident within the building a non-delegable duty to maintain its elevator in a safe condition, Proposition 51--which provides that the liability for noneconomic damages by each defendant in personal injury claim based on comparative fault shall be several only--was inapplicable.
     Koepnick v. Kashiwa Fudosan America, Inc.  - filed April 17, 2009, First District, Div. Five
     Cite as 2009 SOS 2211
      Full text

Back to Top

-Real Estate Brokers-
In breach of contract action relating to real property transaction, summary judgment for defendant on ground that plaintiff had acted as an unlicensed real estate broker was error where there was evidence that at least some of the services provided by plaintiff did not require a broker’s license. Licensed real estate sales person employed by licensed broker may not recover for services rendered where such services required a broker’s license and defendant contracted with sales person, not employing broker, to perform the services.
     Venturi & Company LLC v. Pacific Malibu Development Corp. - filed April 10, 2009, Second District, Div. Eight
     Cite as 2009 SOS 2094
      Full text

Back to Top

-Receivers-
Federal law governs appointment of receiver where jurisdiction is premised on diversity, and district courts have broad discretion to consider a number of factors in considering whether or not to appoint a receiver, with no one factor being dispositive. District court did not abuse its discretion when it appointed receiver to manage mall on basis that mall and associated rents were in danger of substantial waste and risk of loss because income was being diverted and not applied to servicing debt and paying real estate taxes, and on basis that mall revenues were or might become insufficient to discharge debt secured by the property; court's order requiring turnover of rents from before receiver was appointed was similarly not abuse of discretion. Insurer who sought receivership was prevailing party, and therefore entitled to attorneys' fees under terms of deed of trust.
     Canada Life Assurance Co. v. LaPeter - filed March 4, 2009, amended April 8, 2009
     Cite as 0735683
      Full text

Back to Top

-Rent Control-
Costa-Hawkins Rental Housing Act’s general exemption of newly constructed residential units from rent control laws did not preempt or bar city ordinance controlling rents on newly constructed units built on a property that had previously contained rent controlled rental units.
     Apartment Association of Los Angeles County, Inc. v. City of Los Angeles - filed April 17, 2009, Second District, Div. Three
     Cite as B204334
     Full text

Back to Top

Back to Top

Reader Reactions
So - What do you think of the Real Property News?  Please send us your comments and suggestions. This is your newsletter.