Site icon Investing Blog

Procedural Posture

Procedural Posture

In an eminent domain proceeding, petitioner city sought a writ of mandate directing respondent trial court, the Superior Court of Los Angeles County (California), to vacate its order which found, based on respondent’s interpretation of the court’s prior writ of mandate, that petitioner had breached a long term lease of city-owned property to real party in interest lessee by exercising its power of eminent domain prior to the end of the term.

California Business Lawyer & Corporate Lawyer, Inc. can tell you more about CACI defamation

Overview

Petitioner city sought a writ to reverse respondent trial court’s finding that petitioner had breached a long term lease of city-owned property by exercising its power of eminent domain prior to the end of the term. On appeal, the court granted the writ, and held that writ relief was appropriate to correct an error and prevent an expensive trial and possible reversal, and the issue was novel and of importance to all public entity landlords. The court held that petitioner was not liable for breach of the lease because there was no implied agreement in the lease negotiations that petitioner would refrain from exercising eminent domain, petitioner could not contract away its sovereign authority, and contracts between any parties were subject to eminent domain as an unwritten condition. The lease terms, however, could be considered in determining just compensation. Estoppel did not apply because there was no injustice to the lessee, who would be compensated, and there was a strong public policy behind the exercise of the power. The court held that its previous order to the trial court did not address the breach of the lease, so there was no prior law of the case on the issue.

Outcome

The court granted petitioner city’s writ, holding that the condemnation of a leasehold interest by petitioner, a public entity lessor, did not breach the contractual commitment in the lease for a minimum fixed term, because petitioner could not contract away its sovereign authority and any and all contracts were subject to the condition of eminent domain.

Exit mobile version