Tobriner

Redevelopment Agency v. Tobriner

Good Law
153 Cal. App. 3d 367·1984 Cal. App. LEXIS 1789·200 Cal. Rptr. 364
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMarch 21, 1984Civ. 53134California4,080 words

Opinion

Opinion

Scott, J.

This is an appeal from an order granting a new trial in a condemnation action. The Redevelopment Agency of the City of Con cord (the Agency) moved under Code of Civil Procedure section 657 for a new trial on the issue of just compensation. The trial court granted the motion on the ground that it had erred in denying the Agency’s motions to strike the valuation evidence proffered by the condemnees.

The owners of the interests condemned (hereafter appellants) also attack as erroneous the trial court’s holding that the taking was proper; its granting of nonsuit on their cross-complaint in inverse condemnation; and its failure to consider their request for costs and litigation expenses. The Agency has appealed from the court’s order denying judgment notwithstanding the verdict. We affirm in all respects.

I

On May 31, 1978, the Agency filed a complaint in eminent domain against owners, tenants and parties with secured interests in properties in the Concord Shopping Center on Willow Pass Road in Concord (the Concord Center). The property sought to be condemned was described in the Agency’s complaint as “parking cross-easement interests” held and enjoyed by the owners,…

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.