Mohilef

Mohilef v. Janovici

Good Law
1996 Cal. App. LEXIS 1112·51 Cal. App. 4th 267·58 Cal. Rptr. 2d 721·96 Daily Journal DAR 14321·96 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 8675
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaNovember 27, 1996B096420California14,685 words

Opinion

Opinion

Masterson, J.

This case presents the principal question of whether, in an administrative proceeding brought by a municipality to abate a public nuisance, the due process clauses of the state and federal Constitutions require that the offending property owner receive a full, judicial-type hearing.

We hold that due process is satisfied as long as the property owner receives adequate notice of the nature of the alleged nuisance and a meaningful opportunity to respond to the charges against him. It is not necessary that he receive the full panoply of procedural protections accorded in a judicial trial, such as the ability to cross-examine witnesses under oath, to subpoena witnesses, or to engage in discovery.

Background

David and Monica Mohilef own a 7.5-acre ranch located within the gated community of Montería Estates in the Chatsworth area of the City of Los Angeles (the City). The Mohilefs have lived on the property since purchasing it in 1977. The ranch consists of a single-family dwelling, a bam, bird pens, an aviary shelter, and what the City describes as an “ostrich farm.” The properties adjoining the ranch are developed with two-story single-family dwellings.

For at least four…

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.