Skreden

Skreden v. Superior Court

Good Law
126 Cal. Rptr. 411·1975 Cal. App. LEXIS 1651·54 Cal. App. 3d 114
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaDecember 30, 1975Civ. 37124California1,658 words

Opinion

Opinion

Molinari, J.

Petitioners seek a writ of prohibition restraining respondent superior court from taking any further action or proceedings with respect to litigation toward acquisition of petitioners’ real property. They also seek a writ of mandate directing respondent court to vacate the order overruling their demurrer to the complaint of real party in interest, for an order sustaining said demurrer without leave to amend and for a dismissal of the action, and for an award of reasonable attorney, appraisal and engineering fees. An alternative writ of prohibition was issued by this court.

Real party in interest (hereinafter “District”) filed a complaint in eminent domain for condemnation of petitioners’ real property for use as an office and corporation yard. Petitioners’ general demurrer to the complaint was overruled. Thereupon petitioners filed the instant petition. The question presented is whether the District has the statutory authority to exercise the power of eminent domain for the public use of a “district office and corporation yard.”

The District relies upon Health and Safety Code section 2270, subdivision (d), as the statutory basis for its alleged power of condemnation.…

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.