dark blue triangle in newsletter heading
Introductory Remarks
Coming Events
Save the Date!
Recent Cases

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

Teresa Y. Hillery
Vice President and Trial Counsel
Fidelity National Law Group


Real Property Executive Committee:


Susan J. Booth

First Vice Chair
Caroline Dreyfus

Second Vice Chair
Claire Hervey-Collins

Eric Altoon

Misty Sanford  

Immediate Past Chair
Brant Dveirn  

Barristers Liaison
Christopher Bordenave

Section Administrator
Fatima Jones



Nedra E. Austin
Janna Boelke
James Earle
George Fatheree
Robert T. Flick
Daniel L. Goodkin
Owen P. Gross
Marybeth Heydt
Teresa Y. Hillery
Ben Howell
Laurence L. Hummer
Trudi Lesser
Kyle B. Marks
Beth Peterson
Linda E. Spiegel
Kelsey M. Thayer
Loretta Thompson
Seth Weissman



Michael Bayard
Norm Chernin
Peter Gelles
Byron Hayes
Gordon Hunt
Bryan Jackson
Michael Klein
Mark Lamken
Gregg Loubier
Victor Marmon
O'Malley Miller
Donald Nanney
Gytis Nefas
James Richman
Ronald Silverman
Sarah Spyksma
Theresa Tate
Timothy Truax
Richard Volpert
Ira Waldman,
Pamela Westhoff
Norma Williams
Paula Reddish Zinneman


Commercial Development and Leasing
Marcia Gordon
Construction Law
Donna Kirkner
Jane Hinton
General Real Property
Rachel Sanders
Land Use Planning & Environmental Law
Beth Hummer
Title Insurance
Zi Lin



Introductory Remarks

Please let us know how we can better meet your professional needs for education, social networking, and other benefits of membership in our Section. We value your feedback!

Teresa Y. Hillery
Editor, Real Property Section Newsletter
E-mail address:

Coming Events
Purchase and Sale Agreements
February 1, 2017
12:30—1:30 p.m.

Drafting and negotiating purchase and sale agreements are core skills for well-rounded real estate practitioners. Our speakers will focus on the "must have" provisions that will enable you to achieve the best results for your clients, whether they are buyers or sellers.

> Click here for more information
Annual Construction Law Update and Flaig Award
Presented by: Construction Law Subsection
February 28, 2017

12:30—1:30 p.m.

This year's Annual Update portion of the program will be presented by the Construction Law Group from Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton. The program will cover new developments in California Construction Law in 2016. The handout materials from this program should be considered a "must have" for anyone who practices in the construction law area.

> Click here for more information
Save the Date!
Traps to Avoid and War Stories from Mid-Level Associates
February 16, 2017
6:00—8:00 p.m. (1 hour CLE)
Real Estate Business Finance for Lawyers
April 8, 2017
Location and time TBA

Recent Cases
- EPA -

EPA did not act arbitrarily or capriciously in granting a prevention-of-significant-deterioration permit for construction of a new biomass burning power plant at a lumber mill. Because the EPA properly took the requisite hard look at applicant's proposed design and the key purpose of burning its own biomass waste, the EPA reasonably concluded that consideration of solar or increased natural gas would disrupt that purpose and redefine the source. In evaluating objector's claims raised in response to EPA's supplemental greenhouse gas "best available control technology" analysis, EPA's determination was entitled to deference because EPA was largely relying on its own guidance, acting at the frontiers of science.

Helping Hand Tools v. United States Environmental Protection Agency - filed Sept. 2, 2016, amended Dec. 23, 2016
Cite as 2016 S.O.S. 14-72553
Full text click here >

- Land Management -

Bureau of Land Management's approval of project ran afoul of BLM's review of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969. Selection of baseline levels of certain air pollutants was unreasonable, and the analysis of cumulative air impacts was deficient.

Great Basin Resource Watch v. Bureau of Land Management - filed Dec. 28, 2016
Cite as 2016 S.O.S. 14-16812
Full text click here

- Landlord/Tenant -

Lessor served a three-day notice stating past rent due, but did not possess the required permits and certificate of occupancy. The rental agreement was void, no sums were actually due, and the notice was thus defective, precluding the court from awarding possession.

North 7th Street Associates v. Constante; Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles - filed Nov. 16, 2016
Cite as 2017 S.O.S. 43
Full text click here >

The statutory cap on a landlord's claims against a tenant in bankruptcy, set forth in 11 U.S.C. Sec. 502(b)(6), applies only to claims that result directly from the termination of a lease, but not to collateral claims.

In re Kupfer - filed Dec. 29, 2016
Cite as 2016 S.O.S. 14-16697
Full text click here >

- Precondemnation -

Discovery is available in proceedings under the precondemnation statutes, but trial court's erroneous ruling to the contrary was harmless where parties that sought discovery made no assertion of prejudice. Whether lessees and easement holders were indispensable parties in precondemnation proceedings was moot where landowners, who raised the issue, received all of the relief the courts could grant.

Property Reserve, Inc. v. Superior Court (Department of Water Resources) - filed Dec. 16, 2016, Third District
Cite as 2016 S.O.S. 6508
Full text click here > 

- Public Resources Code -

"Substantial conformance review"—a process by which city staff members determine whether a proposed project is consistent with a previously approved project—subject to an appeal to the city's planning commission, is not a form of environmental review under Public Resources Code Sec. 21151(c). Therefore there is no right to appeal the planning commission's decision to the city council.

San Diegans for Open Government v. City of San Diego (Sunroad Enterprises et al.) - filed Dec. 7, 2016, publication ordered Dec. 16, 2016, Fourth District, Div. One
Cite as 2016 S.O.S. 6475
Full text click here >  


In approving final stage of rail project—completion of a partially constructed "loop" around a city block in a residential neighborhood—city did not abuse its discretion by proceeding under Public Resources Code Sec. 21166, which applies to subsequent review of previously approved projects, rather than treating the final stage as a new project under Sec. 21151. There was substantial evidence that the loop described in the resolution approving the final stage was the same loop that was described in the FEIR for the project as part of the "initial operating segment," and that the FEIR, which among other things discussed the loop's effects on parking and pedestrians and the interrelationship between projected growth in population and employment in the surrounding area and the operation of the loop, retained informational value.

Committee for Re-Evaluation of the T-Line Loop v. San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency (Mitchell Engineering - filed Dec. 20, 2016, publication ordered Dec. 22, 2016, First District, Div. Two
Cite as 2016 S.O.S. 6597
Full text click here


© 2017 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 1055 West 7th Street, Suite 2700, Los Angeles, CA 90017-2557.

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

LACBA twitter LACBA on Linkedin Real Property Section homepage Real Property Section Newsletters