Matoza
Matoza v. Superior Court
Opinion
Lead Opinion
Petition for writ of mandate. It appears therefrom that on the twenty-fifth day of May, 1929, the city of Oakland brought an action of eminent domain against petitioner and other defendants as owners of certain real property which the city desired to acquire for certain purposes. On the same day the action was filed, the city of Oakland, through its attorney, presented an affidavit to the judge of the court to whom the action had been assigned for trial and secured an order based upon such affidavit, whereby the city was authorized to take possession of the lands described in the complaint upon its depositing the sum of $375 as security for the lands and property belonging to petitioner, and the sum of $4 to another defendant, one Joseph W. Silva, for his interest as lessee in a certain portion of the lands. On the same day, the city took possession of the land under said order after having deposited the amounts of money stated therein.
It is next alleged that the city, purporting to act under the terms of the order, took possession also of a larger and additional tract of land belonging to petitioner and not involved in the eminent domain proceedings and ousted petitioner from…