Maroot

City of Fresno v. Maroot

Good Law
189 Cal. App. 3d 755·1987 Cal. App. LEXIS 1406·234 Cal. Rptr. 353
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaFebruary 9, 1987F006238California1,670 words

Opinion

Opinion

Brown, J.

—This is the second appeal in this eminent domain case. In the first appeal we reversed a summary judgment in favor of Charles J. Maroot, Jr., and Judith Ann Maroot (Maroot) enforcing a purported settlement agreement between the City of Fresno (City) and the landowners, Maroot. The nonpublished opinion is numbered F002200.

The purported settlement agreement provided for the payment by the City to the landowners, Maroot, of $315,000 for the damages suffered by Maroot by reason of the condemnation of their property, which included a restaurant known as Jon Jon’s. A dispute developed concerning whether the sum provided to be paid included fixtures.

In the former appeal the ground for reversal of the summary judgment was that the trial court erred in refusing to consider certain declarations filed by the parties concerning the disputed points. We also observed, “once the declarations are taken into consideration, as a matter of law they create issues of fact as to the meaning and intent of the parties which can only be resolved by a trier of fact.” Since factual issues cannot be resolved in a motion for summary judgment, we reversed.

When the case went back to the superior…

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.