Brusati

People ex rel. Department of Public Works v. Brusati

Good Law
1963 Cal. App. LEXIS 1580·223 Cal. App. 2d 643·35 Cal. Rptr. 820
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaDecember 20, 1963Civ. No. 27054California1,506 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Wood, J.

In this eminent domain action the defendants (owners) appeal from a judgment, based upon a verdict, awarding $31,000 as compensation for the property taken.

The appraiser, called as a witness by appellants, gave testimony regarding his qualifications as an appraiser, his investigations as to property values in the vicinity of the subject property, and rezoning requirements and variances. He testified that in his opinion the fair market value of the property was $58,400.

The appraiser, called as a witness by the respondent (condemner), after giving testimony regarding his qualifications and his investigations, testified that in his opinion the fair market value was $31,000.

There was no other witness.

A contention of appellants is that the appraiser, who was called as a witness by the condemner, made untrue statements on cross-examination regarding zoning-ordinance information he had received, and by reason of those statements the appellants were denied a fair trial.

One such alleged statement, so specified by appellants, was to the effect the appraiser said he had obtained information from Salvador Salinas (assistant planner in the office of the planning commission) that in…

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.