Connolly Ranch v. Department of Parks and Recreation CA3

facts, which we treat as mutual concessions. (Meddock v. County of Yolo (2013) 220 Cal.App.4th 170, 175, fn. 3.) We set forth the general background here and provide additional factual background pertinent to the Ranch’s arguments in the Discussion post, as necessary.

1 The Ranch’s late filed application for permission to accept the manual transmission of trial exhibits on electronic media is denied. The Ranch submitted the application and exhibits to this court after briefing had concluded, even though the Ranch cited to certain trial exhibits in its opening brief. The Ranch has provided no good reason for its tardiness in transmitting the exhibits.

2 The Department manages the Carnegie State Vehicular Recreation Area (recreation area), which consists of a vast area dedicated to public off-highway recreation riding. The Ranch is located adjacent to the recreation area. SRI International operates an explosive testing facility that borders both the recreation area and the Ranch. In 1990, the Ranch and the State of California (State) entered into an Agreement and Grant of Easement (Agreement). The same year, the trial court entered a judgment, attaching a copy of the…