Polonsky

Polonsky v. City of South Lake Tahoe

Good Law
121 Cal. App. 3d 464·176 Cal. Rptr. 319·1981 Cal. App. LEXIS 1950
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaApril 3, 1981Civ. 19159California583 words

Opinion

Opinion

Paras, J.

Plaintiffs, lot owners and disappointed applicants for sewer and building permits, appeal from a judgment of dismissal following the sustaining of defendants’ demurrer without leave to amend. We affirm.

According to the factual allegations in the writ petition, which we accept as true (Haggerty v. County of Kings (1953) 117 Cal.App.2d 470, 478 [ 256 P.2d 393 ]), plaintiffs purchased an unimproved lot in a subdivision in South Lake Tahoe in 1976. The subdivider had been assured by district personnel that sewer services, prerequisite for obtaining city building permits, would be available. This was not the case and the district knew it and concealed it.

Plaintiffs applied for a sewer connection in May of 1977 and for a building permit in July of that year. At the time, the district was not allowing any sewer connections and plaintiffs were assigned to position 194 on the waiting list. Plaintiffs lost this position in January 1979 when all prior applications were denied and a system plaintiffs designate a “lottery” was instituted by ordinance. The ordinance required ownership of record as of January 31,1979, as a prerequisite for participation in a random allocation of…

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.