Wildensten

Wildensten v. East Bay Regional Park District

Good Law
1991 Cal. App. LEXIS 762·231 Cal. App. 3d 976·283 Cal. Rptr. 13·91 Daily Journal DAR 8053·91 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 5213
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJune 11, 1991A048056California2,083 words

Opinion

Opinion

Benson, J.

Plaintiff Mary V. Wildensten appeals from the judgment entered after the trial court sustained a demurrer to her first amended complaint without leave to amend. The trial court ruled that Wildensten failed to state a cause of action for inverse condemnation. We affirm.

Factual and Procedural Background

The relevant allegations of Wildensten’s first amended complaint are as follows: “3. That at all relevant times, plaintiff was and is the owner of real property on Rifle Range Road, Contra Costa County. Plaintiff’s property is bordered on the northeast by lands of Wildcat Canyon Regional Park managed and owned by the defendant East Bay Regional Park as an improvement within the meaning of said term as defined in section 38002 of the Government Code of the State of California.

“4. That immediately below plaintiff’s real property on a steep slope within Wildcat Canyon Regional Park is a coalescing complex of active and dormant landslide deposits described by geotechnicians employed by the defendant District as earth slumps and earth flows, or complex slump earth flows; and in addition, a very large landslide encompassing all of the smaller active and dormant features, and…

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.