Everett

Everett v. Mountains Recreation etc. Auth.

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaAugust 13, 2015B254753California4,251 words

Opinion

Opinion

FACTS

As always in reviewing a ruling on a demurrer, we accept as true all properly pleaded facts, as well as facts which are subject to judicial notice, but not deductions or conclusions of law or fact. (See, e.g., Zelig v. County of Los Angeles (2002) 27 Cal.4th 1112, 1126.) In accord with these principles, the facts in Everett’s case, as settled in the context of his pleading and MRCA’s demurrer, are as follows. Background The Conservancy is a public entity formed by a “joint exercise of powers agreement” (see Gov. Code, § 6502) between the Santa Monica Mountains Conservancy, a public agency within the state’s Natural Resources Agency (see Pub. Res. Code, § 33200 et seq.), and two local recreation and park districts (see Pub. Res. Code, § 5780 et seq.), the Conejo Recreation and Park District, and the Rancho Simi Recreation and Park District. Under the terms of the joint exercise of powers agreement, MRCA has been given designated powers to manage a number of parkland properties for the three

2 contracting agencies. In short, three public agencies which own parkland property created a fourth public agency to manage their properties.1 In 2003, MRCA adopted an ordinance…

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.