Robinson

Robinson v. City of Alameda

Good Law
194 Cal. App. 3d 1286·1987 Cal. App. LEXIS 2130·239 Cal. Rptr. 926
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaSeptember 18, 1987A036850California843 words

Opinion

Opinion

Channell, J.

Respondents Robert and Bonny Robinson obtained a peremptory writ of mandate compelling appellant City of Alameda to rescind a notice of violation recorded against property owned by real parties in interest Orín and Martha Dalaba. The city appeals, contending that (1) the real property was subdivided in circumvention of the Subdivision Map Act; (2) the writ of mandate is not the correct remedy; and (3) the Robin-sons did not exhaust their administrative remedies. We affirm the judgment.

I. Facts

In 1977, respondents Robert and Bonny Robinson owned two parcels of land in Alameda, at 1032 and 1036 Regent Street. They continue to occupy the residence at 1032 Regent Street. In December 1980, they sold the 1036 Regent Street property to David Webster, subject to the terms of a written agreement providing that the Robinsons could continue to use the rear portion of the lot. This agreement was to remain in effect until either the Robinsons sold their home at 1032 Regent Street or until both of the Robinsons died. In March 1984, Webster sold the 1036 Regent Street property to Orin and Martha Dalaba, subject to the terms of the Robinson- Webster agreement. At some point, the…

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.