Harrison

City of Fresno v. Harrison

Good Law
154 Cal. App. 3d 296·1984 Cal. App. LEXIS 2923·201 Cal. Rptr. 219
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaApril 9, 1984Civ. 7681California2,335 words

Opinion

Opinion

Woolpert, J.

In this condemnation case we are asked to set aside the trial judge’s decision to grant a new trial after it became apparent the condemning agency had not made a timely, good-faith disclosure of the basis for its expert’s opinion that there was no loss of business goodwill. We decline to do so, emphasizing the importance of full pretrial disclosure of proposed expert testimony as well as the unique position of the trial judge in reviewing the fairness of the trial.

The City of Fresno (City) sought to acquire by eminent domain certain downtown property owned by Thomas Harrison and his wife, and upon which he conducted an auto parts supply business. Harrison prior to trial moved his business within the same general downtown area, City having exercised its right to immediate possession. The Harrisons sought proper compensation, including loss of business goodwill. The date of valuation was set as October 15, 1981, the day following the filing of the complaint. (Code Civ. Proc., § 1263.110.)

Before trial the parties reached a settlement as to the value of the land and improvements. Only the issue of compensation for loss of business goodwill came to trial on September 20,…

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.