Real Property Section-newsletter-banner 2
dark blue triangle in newsletter heading
Introductory Remarks
Coming Events
CLE Anytime
Members Spotlights
Recent Cases

The Real Property Section Newsletter is published monthly by the Real Property Section.

Rachel M. Sanders
Senior Counsel | Real Estate Litigation
Allen Matkins Leck Gamble Mallory & Natsis LLP


Real Property Executive Committee:


Kelsey M. Thayer 

Vice Chair (Programming)
Teresa Y. Hillery 

Vice Chair (Communications)
Rachel M. Sanders

Vice Chair (Membership)
Daniel K. Liffmann

Owen P. Gross

Trudi J. Lesser

Immediate Past Chair
Eric A. Altoon



Norman A. Chernin
Claire Hervey Collins
Caroline Dreyfus
Brant H. Dveirin
Kimia Ghalambor
Marcia Gordon
Jane L. Hinton
Laurence L. Hummer
Danielle Katzir
Linda E. Spiegel
Ira J. Waldman

Law School Liaison
Misty M. Sanford

Barrister’s Liaison (non-voting)
Vivienne Chen

Section Administrator
Fatima Jones



Commercial Development and Leasing Subsection, Co-Chairs
Steven Farenbaugh
Dan Villalpando

Construction Law Subsection, Chair
John D. Hanover

General Real Property Subsection, Co-Chairs
Michael Davis
Joe Dzida

Land Use Planning and Environmental Law, Subsection Chair
Julie Hamill

Real Estate Finance Subsection, Co-Chairs
Mark Hikin
Gretta Moy

Title Insurance Subsection, Chair
James H. Treadwell



Roy H. Aaron*
Eric A. Altoon 
Michael J. Bayard
Stephen M. Blitz
Susan J. Booth
Elizabeth Spedding Calciano
Robert E. Carter
Norm Chernin
R. Bradbury Clark*
Claire Hervey Collins 
Professor William Coskran*
Caroline Dreyfus
Anson Dreison*
Brant H. Dveirin
Peter Gelles
Gail Gordon*
Byron Hayes, Jr.
Gordon Hunt
Bryan C. Jackson
Michael S. Klein
Preston Kline*
Bernard Kolbor
Robert Krueger*
Mark L. Lamken*
Marvin Leon
Gregg J. Loubier
Victor I. Marmon
Jerold L. Miles
O’Malley M. Miller
Rodney Moss*
Donald C. Nanney
Gytis L. Nefas
Carl B. Phelps
Laurence G. Preble
James D. Richman
Peter E. Robinson
Floyd Sayer*
Margaret J. Schock
Ronald I. Silverman
Sarah V.J. Spyksma
Theresa C. Tate
Timothy M. Truax
Richard S. Volpert
Ira J. Waldman
Alan Wayte*
Pamela L. Westhoff
John W. Whitaker
George H. Whitney*
Norma J. Williams
John M. Yunker, Jr.
Paula Reddish Zinnemann




Introductory Remarks

We are pleased to announce that the Real Property Sections of the Los Angeles County Bar Association and the California Lawyers Association are joining forces for the third year in a row to host the Crocker Commercial Real Estate Symposium, to be held virtually the afternoon of September 9, 2021. Please save the date! Additional details to follow.

Rachel M. Sanders
Editor, Real Property Section Newsletter
E-mail address:

Find Us on Social Media

LinkedIn Instagram Twitter
Coming Events

May 12, 12:00 p.m. -1:00 p.m.
Navigating California's ADU Laws

The speakers will provide a primer on the laws and regulations pertaining to accessory dwelling units, and how these play out in practice. United Dwelling will explain their unique business model that designs, permits, builds, installs, and manages ADUs.

Click here for more information and to register.


LACBA Real Property CLE Anytime

Even if you can't attend our Real Property Section events, you can earn CLE credit by viewing our streaming videos. Here are a few options. Click any link below.

A Primer on How Title Companies Underwrite Construction Loans Since the Last Great Recession
Real Estate Applied Bankruptcy Basics and Evolving Developments in a Post-Pandemic Era
Commercial CC&R's and Reciprocal Easement Agreements
2021 Flaig Award & Annual Construction Law Update
Ground Lease Practice: Beyond the Basics
Nuts and Bolts of E-Recording

Members Spotlights

The Real Property Section is excited to feature monthly member spotlights. If you are a member of the Real Property Section and would like to be spotlighted in an upcoming post and newsletter, please contact our social media manager, Vivienne Chen, at

Member Spotlight - Julie Hamill_540w

Member Spotlight - Jane Hinton_540w

Recent Cases
- California Coastal Act -

The burdens of permits run with the land once the benefits have been accepted; §30811 of the Coastal Act does not specify against whom the Coastal Commission may issue a restoration order, nor does it distinguish between developers and property owners; nothing in the statutory scheme suggests that §30810 applies only to persons who build an unpermitted development and that §30811 applies more broadly to persons who build the development and to subsequent property owners. Due Process does not require an administrative agency to notify an alleged violator of an exact penalty the agency intends to impose, so long as the agency provides adequate notice of the substance of the charge; §30821 is not facially unconstitutional, or as-applied to property owners who have not identified any specific procedural protection that was allegedly necessary to avoid an erroneous deprivation of their interests.

Lent v. California Coastal Commission - filed April 5, 2021, Second District, Div. Seven
Cite as 2021 S.O.S. 1423
Full text click here

- Environmental Law -

Assuming without deciding that a property owner's work restoring a breached levee constituted a repair for purposes of Public Resources Code §29508(b), any work that went beyond fixing or maintaining the breached levee does not qualify for the exemption from the marsh development permit required by the Suisun Marsh Preservation Act; work did not fall within §29501.5's exception for work consistent with a site's local protection program where the work had no reasonable connection to the management contemplated in an existing individual water management program.

Sweeney v. San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission - filed Feb. 18, 2021, publication ordered March 18, 2021, First District, Div. Three
Cite as 2021 S.O.S. 1171
Full text click here

A state cannot obtain an equitable apportionment of interstate waters unless it first proves by clear and convincing evidence a serious injury caused by another state; where the record evidence establishes at most that increased salinity and predation contributed to the collapse of a state's fisheries, the state did not establish its neighbor's overconsumption of water was a substantial factor contributing to its injury, much less the sole cause.

Florida v. Georgia - filed April 1, 2021
Cite as 2021 S.O.S. 22o142
Full text click here >

When apportioning water in an overdrafted basin among correlative rights holders, a court should employ equitable apportionment principles and eschew mechanically-based calculations to the extent necessary to reach an equitable apportionment of the available water.

Antelope Valley Groundwater Cases - filed March 16, 2021, publication ordered April 6, 2021, Fifth District
Cite as 2021 S.O.S. 1467
Full text click here

Assembly Bill 10X is not a tax subject to Proposition 13. Health and Safety Code §39613 does not unlawfully delegate legislative power to the State Air Resources Board, and it comports with both due process and equal protection.

American Coatings Association v. State Air Resources Board - filed April 12, 2021, Third District
Cite as 2021 S.O.S. 1519
Full text click here

Where a party's uses of groundwater had ripened into a prescriptive interest in the available groundwater, the party's water use was transformed from an appropriative use into rights entitled to equivalent priority with the rights of overliers; when apportioning water in an overdrafted basin among correlative rights holders, a court may employ equitable apportionment principles to the extent necessary to reach a practical apportionment of the available water among parties holding equivalent priorities.

Antelope Valley Groundwater Cases - filed March 16, 2021, publication ordered April 14, 2021, Fifth District
Cite as 2021 S.O.S. 1551
Full text click here >  

- Fair Housing Act -

In exercising its discretion whether to award costs to a prevailing defendant under the Fair Housing Act's fee-shifting provision, a district court must apply the Christiansburg standard, which requires the court first to determine whether the plaintiff's claim was frivolous, unreasonable, or groundless.

Green v. Mercy Housing - filed March 19, 2021
Cite as 2021 S.O.S. 20-15134
Full text click here >

- Inverse Condemnation -

Before an inverse condemnation action is ripe, a landowner must have made at least one development proposal that has been thoroughly rejected by land use authorities and have prosecuted at least one meaningful application for a zoning variance, which has been finally denied; multiple applications are not required where the permit denial makes clear that no development of the property would be allowed under any circumstance.

Felkay v. City of Santa Barbara - filed March 18, 2021, Second District, Div. Six
Cite as 2021 S.O.S. 1192
Full text click here


© 2021 Los Angeles County Bar Association Contact LACBA at


You are subscribed to as %%emailaddr%% .

You are receiving this message because you are a member of the Los Angeles County Bar Association (LACBA) or one of its sections, have registered to receive correspondence through LACBA's website, or are a member of the legal profession. If you wish to be excluded from any future correspondence, please see instructions below or mail us at 200 South Spring Street, Los Angeles, CA 90012.

To unsubscribe from this mailing list, click the following url, %%url.unsub%% or copy and paste the following url into your browser %%url.unsub%%


Real Property twitter Real Property on Linkedin Real Property Section homepage Real Property Section Newsletters Real Property facebook Real Property Instagram