Sutfin v. State of California
California Court of Appeal
1Opinion of the CourtRegan, J.
In this action for damages for inverse condemnation, the trial court sustained the demurrer of defendant State of California, without leave to amend, stating plaintiffs’ amended complaint failed to state a cause of action. Plaintiffs appeal from the trial court’s judgment that the action he dismissed with prejudice as to defendant State of California.
By their first amended complaint plaintiffs allege that within the time allowed by law their claims for damages against defendant State of California were served and filed and thereafter denied; that defendant State of California participated in…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- Armstrong v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1960
- Monongahela Navigation Co. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1893
- Albers v. County of Los AngelesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1965
- United States v. Caltex (Philippines), Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1953
- Clement v. State Reclamation BoardCalifornia Supreme Court · 1950
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by25 opinions
- Baker v. Burbank-Glendale-Pasadena Airport AuthorityCalifornia Supreme Court · 1985
- City of Oakland v. Oakland RaidersCalifornia Supreme Court · 1982
- Community Redevelopment Agency v. AbramsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1975
- McMahan's of Santa Monica v. City of Santa MonicaCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1983
- Warner/elektra/atlantic Corporation, Plaintiffs-Appellants/cross-Appellees v. County of Dupage, Defendant-Appellee/cross-AppellantCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1993
20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.