Legacy Group v. City of Wasco

Good Law
106 Cal. App. 4th 1305·131 Cal. Rptr. 2d 460·2003 Cal. App. LEXIS 389·2003 Daily Journal DAR 2911·2003 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 2291
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMarch 13, 2003F038382California3,009 words

Opinion

Opinion

Gomes, J.

Developers of a subdivision sued a city for breach of the development agreements, indemnification, equitable estoppel and declaratory relief alleging the city wrongfully stopped acquiring infrastructure constructed by the developers for the subdivision. The city claimed it had no further obligation to acquire infrastructure because the 1:3 lien-to-value ratio specified in the contract had not been maintained. The trial court interpreted the agreements to mean that the developers could not sue for monetary damages and also held that all causes of action were barred by the statute of limitations in Government Code section 66499.37.

In the unpublished portion of this opinion, we hold that the agreement is ambiguous and reasonably susceptible to two interpretations that do not eliminate monetary damages as a remedy. We remand the interpretation of the agreement to the trial court. Issues concerning whether or not the lien-to-value ratio was maintained and whether or not the city was subject to equitable estoppel were not reached by the trial court and, accordingly, those issues are remanded also.

In the published portion of this opinion, we hold that a cause of action for…

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.