Santa Barbara Pistachio Ranch v. Chowchilla Water District

Good Law
105 Cal. Rptr. 2d 856·2001 Cal. App. LEXIS 272·2001 Daily Journal DAR 3613·88 Cal. App. 4th 439·44 U.C.C. Rep. Serv. 2d (West) 349
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaApril 11, 2001F033129California3,359 words

Opinion

Opinion

Wiseman, J.

Santa Barbara Pistachio Ranch and Maple Leaf Pistachio Ranch (plaintiffs) filed suit against Chowchilla Water District (the District), alleging irrigation water provided by the District resulted in the death of several of their mature pistachio trees. At trial, the court ruled the proper measure of damages was the diminution in the value of plaintiffs’ land and the cost of restoring the trees, but not the lost profits that could have been derived from the diseased trees. Conceding their damages were de minimis under the court’s ruling, plaintiffs made an offer of proof and requested that nonsuit be entered against them. On appeal, plaintiffs contend that our holding in Serian Brothers, Inc. v. Agri-Sun Nursery (1994) 25 Cal.App.4th 306 [ 30 Cal.Rptr.2d 382 ], applies to claims for damages to permanent crops arising under trespass and nuisance theories of liability and that the proper measure of their damages includes lost future profits. We find Serian Brothers is not controlling here, since it did not directly address the issue of lost profits based on tort theories of liability. However, we conclude the court erred in granting nonsuit, as lost profits may potentially be…

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.