Oroville Dam Cases CA3

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMarch 15, 2022C090941California3,516 words

Opinion

Opinion

Renner, J.

I. BACKGROUND

We begin with an initial overview of the procedural history that led to this appeal. Plaintiffs filed their operative complaint “on behalf of the approximately 188,000 residents of Oroville, Marysville, Yuba City, and other areas near the Feather River who were ordered to evacuate their homes on February 12, 2017[,] in response to the failing ‘emergency spillway’ at the Oroville Dam.” Specifically, the complaint indicated Plaintiffs sought to represent a class of “[a]ll persons evacuated on or about February 12, 2017[,] as a result of the failure of the Oroville Dam spillway.” The complaint alleges three causes of action against DWR: (1) private nuisance, (2) public nuisance, and (3) dangerous condition of public property. This action and others were coordinated under Judicial Council order (Code Civ. Proc., § 404.3; Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.540) in the Sacramento County Superior Court as the Oroville Dam Cases (JCCP No. 4974) and assigned to the Honorable James E. McFetridge as coordination trial judge. Plaintiffs filed a motion for class certification that sought to certify a class of: “[a]ll persons who evacuated their residence on February 12, 2017[,]…

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.