Rasooly

Rasooly v. City of Oakley

Good Law
239 Cal. Rptr. 3d 918·29 Cal. App. 5th 348
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaOctober 25, 2018A152709California3,049 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Bruiniers, J.

*351 The City of Oakley (City) initiated abatement proceedings seeking to demolish an industrial building owned by Michael Rasooly. Rasooly sought a writ of *921 mandate in superior court, challenging the City's abatement order. While that matter was pending, the City initiated a second administrative abatement action on the same property. Rasooly amended his mandamus complaint to challenge the second action. The City filed a motion for judgment on the basis that Rasooly had failed to pursue his administrative remedy. The trial court granted the motion. We affirm. *352 I. FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY

The facts appear largely undisputed. Rasooly owns a vacant industrial building at 150 Acme Street in Oakley (Property). 1 The City "red tagged" the building on July 1, 2015, alleging structural deterioration rendered it unsafe to occupy. The City issued a "Notice and Order to Repair or Demolish Structure" in August 2015 (the 2015 Notice). Rasooly appealed the 2015 Notice and, in June 2016, the Oakley City Council rejected his appeal. On August 4, 2016, Rasooly filed a petition for writ of mandate in the Contra Costa County Superior Court, seeking an order that the City set aside its…

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.