Legal Opinion

Coppinger v. Rawlins

California Court of Appeal

Decided August 14, 2015No. E060664PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

RAMIREZ, P. J.

Prior owners subdivided their land into two parcels, dedicating narrow lots “A,” “B,” and “C” (Lots A, B, and C) to defendant County of Riverside (County) for public road and utility purposes. The County accepted the dedication in 1980, with the proviso that Lots B and C would not immediately become part of the county-maintained road system. In 1984, plaintiffs Connie and Joseph Coppinger, Jr., purchased one parcel. Defendants Rogelio and Maria Rawlins purchased the other parcel, and used Lot C for ingress and egress. Plaintiffs erected a gate to prevent the Rawlinses…

2Cases cited24 opinions

  1. Blank v. KirwanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1985
  2. Aubry v. Tri-City Hospital DistrictCalifornia Supreme Court · 1992
  3. Schifando v. City of Los AngelesCalifornia Supreme Court · 2003
  4. McCall v. PacifiCare of California, Inc.California Supreme Court · 2001
  5. Loeffler v. Target CorporationCalifornia Supreme Court · 2014

19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Aluma Systems Concrete Construction of California v. Nibbi Bros.California Court of Appeal · 2016

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API