City of Pasadena v. Superior Court

Good Law
176 Cal. Rptr. 3d 422·2014 Cal. App. LEXIS 733·228 Cal. App. 4th 1228·2014 WL 3956750
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaAugust 14, 2014B254800California3,429 words

Opinion

Opinion

Croskey, J.

During a windstorm in late November 2011, a tree owned by the City of Pasadena (City) fell on the residence of James O’Halloran. As a result of the damage caused to the house, the insurer Mercury Casualty Company (Mercury) paid benefits to O’Halloran pursuant to his homeowners insurance policy. Mercury then sued the City for inverse condemnation and nuisance based on the damages caused by the tree.

The City now seeks a writ of mandate challenging the trial court’s order denying summary adjudication with respect to these causes of action. The City argues that summary adjudication should have been granted because (1) the subject tree was not a work of public improvement such that the City may be held liable for inverse condemnation, and (2) Mercury failed to submit any evidence that the City was negligent such that the City may be held liable for nuisance. We disagree and deny the writ.

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

More than 5,000 trees in the City were damaged by the windstorm that struck the City on November 30, 2011, including the tree that fell on O’Halloran’s residence. The residence experienced extensive damage for which Mercury paid $293,000 in benefits to…

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.