Hurtado

Hurtado v. Jones CA2/5

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMarch 6, 2026B345337California2,379 words

Opinion

Opinion

FACTS AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

I. Facts1

A. The Parties Jones and Hurtado own neighboring residential properties in Pomona. The properties share a border, but the homes are accessed by driveways on different streets. Jones moved into his residence in September 2020, and Hurtado moved into his residence in August 2021. When Hurtado moved in, he went to Jones’s door to introduce himself. The first thing Jones said to Hurtado was, “hold up, let me put my gun down,” an exchange that Hurtado found “kind of scary.” B. The Boundary Dispute Within a few months of moving in, Hurtado decided to renovate his driveway. Jones accused Hurtado of encroaching on his property and disagreed with Hurtado’s assessment of the precise property line. As a result, Hurtado asked Jones to split the cost of a land survey. Jones refused, so Hurtado paid for the land survey himself. Jones “blatantly refused” to acknowledge

Consistent with the applicable standard of review, we recount the facts in the light most favorable to the prevailing party and indulge all reasonable inferences in favor of the trial court’s findings. (Harris v. Stampolis (2016) 248 Cal.App.4th 484, 499 (Harris).)

2…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.