Corrigan

Corrigan v. Kent CA2/6

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaNovember 12, 2014B247707California1,800 words

Opinion

Opinion

FACTS

Plaintiffs filed a complaint for injunctive relief against Kent, "individually and as [t]rustee" of the Jill Dore Kent Living Trust. They alleged that Kent owned a home next to their property, on which a large oak tree on Kent's property obstructed their view of the ocean, a violation of Santa Barbara City view ordinance No. 5220. The ordinance established "the right of a real property owner to preserve scenic views and access to sunlight free from unreasonable obstructions caused by the growth of trees under circumstances where such views and sunlight access existed prior to the growth of the unreasonable obstruction." Plaintiffs sought an order reducing the size of Kent's tree. In her answer, Kent alleged she had a right to maintain that tree because the relief sought was not consistent with the city's view ordinance. Plaintiffs propounded requests for admissions to Kent. Request No. 5 asked her to admit that plaintiffs "have satisfied the procedural prerequisites of the VIEW ORDINANCE in order to file their COMPLAINT." Requests Nos. 7-9 asked Kent to admit that the growth of her oak tree obstructed plaintiffs' scenic views. Request No. 17 asked her 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.