City of San Jose v. Union Pacific Railroad Co.

Good Law
110 Cal. Rptr. 3d 747·185 Cal. App. 4th 624·2010 Cal. App. LEXIS 864
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMay 20, 2010H033503California4,124 words

Opinion

Opinion

Premo, J.

Plaintiff City of San Jose (City) sued defendant Union Pacific Railroad Company (Union Pacific) to condemn roadway easements over railroad tracks so as to widen a road already traversing the tracks. The parties agreed on the taking and litigated the compensation issue in a court trial based on stipulated facts. The trial court awarded Union Pacific nominal compensation for the taking insofar as the easements traversed the property within the track corridor. And it awarded fair-market-value compensation for the taking insofar as the easements traversed the property outside the track corridor. Union Pacific appeals from the judgment and contends that it was entitled to fair-market-value compensation for the taking within the track corridor. City appeals from the judgment and contends that Union Pacific was entitled to only nominal compensation for the taking outside the track corridor. At the heart of the dispute is whether City of Oakland v. Schenck (1925) 197 Cal. 456 [ 241 P. 545 ] (Schenck), is controlling authority. We conclude that it is. We therefore affirm the judgment.

BACKGROUND

We appreciate the trial court’s concise statement of decision and adopt it as…

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.