dark blue triangle in newsletter heading
Introductory Remarks
Coming Events
Recent Cases
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
Brandon Ward
Title Insurance
Zi Lin



Introductory Remarks

Happy Holidays!

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

Coming Events
Conflicts of Interest for Real Estate Lawyers
December 7, 2016

Join us for a lively discussion with a real estate practitioner and recognized expert in the field of legal ethics about managing conflicts of interest and duties related to negotiating real estate transactions and how pending changes to the Rules of Professional Conduct will affect these issues.

> Click here for more information


Recent Cases

In a condemnation proceeding, for purposes of the threshold determination of entitlement to compensation for loss of goodwill, a party must establish that the taking caused some amount of loss of goodwill due to the taking (along with the other requisites of the statute). A party does not need not prove a "quantitative" loss of goodwill, i.e. that its pre-taking goodwill value (its total business value minus the value of its tangible assets) exceeded its post-taking goodwill value.

People ex rel. Department of Transportation v. Presidio Performing Arts Foundation - filed Nov. 3, 2016, First District, Div. Five
Cite as 2016 S.O.S. 5617
Full text click here >


Trial court erred when it enjoined state Department of Transportation from removing an obstruction that plaintiff placed against a ditch culvert within a state highway right-of-way without an encroachment permit. There was no evidence to support an exception to the statutory bar prohibiting injunctions that prevent the execution of a public statute by public officers for public purposes.

Jamison v. Department of Transportation - filed Oct. 19, 2016, Third District
Cite as 2016 S.O.S. 5181
Full text click here

-Environmental Impact-

EIR, which found no significant impact of congested traffic on streets in area impacted by proposed residential development, erred in relying on general plan that permit congested traffic conditions within the core area of the city. Compliance with a general plan policy does not conclusively establish there is no significant environmental impact, and city failed to explain why it found none in circumstance where, under cumulative plus project conditions, it found there would be significant delays at several intersections near the project.

East Sacramento Partnership for a Livable City v. City of Sacramento (Encore McKinley Village, LLC) - filed Nov. 7, 2016, Third District
Cite as 2016 S.O.S. 5636
Full text click here >

Environmental impact statement for Tahoe Regional Planning Authority's "regional plan update" complied with the requirements of the Regional Planning Compact between California and Nevada. The EIS and the update adequately addressed the localized effects of the runoff created by the amount of development permitted under the update. The analysis of the effects of concentrating development in "community centers" was not arbitrary or capricious and did not violate Art. VII(a)(2)(A) of the compact. TRPA's assumptions regarding best management practices and whether they would reduce water quality impacts of concentrated development under the update were not arbitrary or capricious and were supported by substantial evidence.

Sierra Club v. Tahoe Regional Planning Agency - filed Nov. 2, 2016
Cite as 2016 S.O.S. 14-15998 web
Full text click here >

- Fisheries -

National Marine Fisheries Service's decision to list certain "sea ice seal" species as likely to become endangered within the foreseeable future was not arbitrary or capricious where NMFS used climate projections to determine that the loss of sea ice over shallow waters in the Arctic would leave the species endangered by the year 2095. The administrative record demonstrated that NMFS provided a reasonable and evidence-based justification for its mid-century and end-of-century sea ice projections. NMFS clearly fulfilled its procedural and substantive obligations under Sec. 4(i) of the Endangered Species Act, 16 U.S.C. Sec. 1533(i), to provide state with a written justification.

Alaska Oil and Gas Association v. Pritzker - filed Oct. 24, 2016
Cite as 2016 S.O.S. 14-35806
Full text click here > 


Issuance of a new National Pollution Discharge Elimination system permit to county and related defendants during pendency of appeal, resulted in ruling that defendants violated their previous permit because their monitoring stations recorded levels of pollution that exceeded the receiving water limitations in the permit. It did not render moot plaintiffs' request for injunctive relief because it was not "absolutely clear" that defendants would not engage in conduct that would have violated prior permit conditions as well as those of the new permit.

Natural Resources Defense Council v. County of Los Angeles - filed Oct. 31, 2016
Cite as 2016 S.O.S. 15-55562
Full text click here >  

- Quiet Title -

Plaintiffs were not equitably estopped to bring action to quiet title and compel defendants to remove a retaining wall and other improvements they built without plaintiff's approval on land plaintiff owned adjacent to defendants' property. Although defendants claimed plaintiff promised not to pursue a claim that construction of the wall violated applicable restrictions, equitable estoppel requires the party asserting it to be ignorant of the true facts and to justifiably rely on the conduct or statements of another who has knowledge of those facts. Evidence supported the conclusion that plaintiff did not know all of the facts and it made its statements after defendants knowingly constructed the retaining wall and other improvements on plaintiff's property without obtaining the required written approvals from plaintiff.

Nellie Gail Ranch Owners Association v. McMullin - filed Oct. 3, 2016, publication ordered Oct. 27, 2016, Fourth District, Div. Three
Cite as 2016 S.O.S. 5455
Full text click here

- Quitclaim Deeds-

Plaintiff's and defendant's mother, the testator, executed a quitclaim deed before executing her will. The deed gave a one-third interest in her real property to a family trust of which she and defendant were trustees, a one-third interest to her daughter, and a one-third interest to defendant. Subsequent quitclaim deeds transferred various interests in the property, but not defendant's one-third interest; and testator's will purported to convey all of her interest in the property to a trust for the benefit of plaintiff. Trial court did not err in concluding that defendant remained the owner of a one-third interest in the property, and defendant's efforts to protect that interest did not violate the will's no-contest clause.

Estate of Dayan -filed Nov. 3, 2016, Second District, Div. Five
Cite as 2016 S.O.S. 5593
Full text click here

- Redevelopment Property Tax -

Trial court did not err in ruling that upon dissolution of a community redevelopment agency, real property tax increment revenue from a real property tax imposed to raise funds for the pension obligations of the county in which the agency was located must be, under Art. XVI, Sec. 16 of the state Constitution, distributed to the Redevelopment Property Tax Trust Fund to pay the debts of the former redevelopment agency. Under the "waterfall" and "reverse waterfall" provisions of legislation dissolving former redevelopment agency, only the amount necessary to service former redevelopment agency's bond debt may be deducted from the amount that passes through from the Redevelopment Property Tax Trust Fund to the county under a "passthrough" agreement, instead of being used to meet the enforceable obligations of the former redevelopment agency.

City of San Jose v. Sharma - filed Nov. 3, 2016, Third District
Cite as 2016 S.O.S. 5541
Full text click here


© 2016 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