Gardner

Gardner v. County of Sonoma

Good Law
112 Cal. Rptr. 2d 386·92 Cal. App. 4th 1055·2001 WL 1205360
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJanuary 16, 2002A093139California4,644 words

Opinion

Opinion

In 19th century California, antiquated maps embodied the entrepreneurial hopes and financial dreams of some settlers who drew plans for vast estates of teeming subdivisions. "These subdivisions are the legacies of 19th century would—be developers whose dreams of carving up their land into profitable real estate parcels went only as far as the county recorder's office." ( Morehart v. County of Santa Barbara (1994) 7 Cal.4th 725, 765 , 29 Cal. Rptr.2d 804 , 872 P.2d 143 (Morehart) (cone. opn. of Mosk, J.).) Despite the bold vision of those who created them, such early subdivision maps—if drawn and recorded before 1893—do not create legal parcels within the meaning of California's Subdivision Map Act (Gov.Code, § 66410 et seq.).

Appellants Jack and Jocelyn Gardner, Trustees of the Gardner Family Trust, and Lindsay and Hilary Gardner own certain lots and fragments of lots depicted on an antiquated subdivision map recorded prior to 1893, when the first California statute regulating subdivision maps took effect. (Stats. 1893, ch. 80, § 1, p. 96; see Curtin et al, California Subdivision Map Act Practice (Cont.Ed.Bar 2d ed.2001) § 1.2, pp. 2-3.) Appellants asked respondent…

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.