Skoumbas

Skoumbas v. City of Orinda

Caution
165 Cal. App. 4th 783·2008 Cal. App. LEXIS 1175·81 Cal. Rptr. 3d 242·38 Envtl. L. Rep. (Envtl. Law Inst.) 20192
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJuly 31, 2008A117960California4,877 words

Opinion

Opinion

Siggins, J.

Konstantine and Alexandra Skoumbas appeal the dismissal of their suit seeking damages for inverse condemnation, nuisance, and trespass, following a grant of summary judgment in favor of the City of Orinda (the City). The trial court concluded the City could not be held liable for erosion caused by water discharged from a storm drain because there was no evidence the entire drainage system was a public improvement owned by the City or its predecessor in interest. We conclude that the critical inquiry is not whether the entire system was a public improvement, but rather whether the City acted reasonably in its maintenance and control over those portions of the drainage system it does own. Accordingly, we conclude the existence of triable issues of material fact precluded the grant of summary judgment, and reverse.

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

The Skoumbas property consists of several undeveloped parcels of land on an Orinda hillside in an area known as the Oak Springs subdivision that was created in the 1920’s. Their property is to the west and downhill from a subdivision, tract 2742, developed in the 1960’s. Tract 2742 includes Candlestick Road, a publicly dedicated…

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.