Legal Opinion

Holtz v. San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit District

California Supreme Court

Decided August 2, 1976No. S.F. 23398PublishedCited by 39 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

MOSK, J.

Plaintiffs Max and Harry Holtz recovered a judgment of $30,000 in an action for inverse condemnation against the Bay Area Rapid Transit District (BART). They alleged that excavations by BART of a sidewalk area adjacent to their property resulted in the withdrawal of lateral support from a building on the land, so that the foundation of the structure settled, causing cracks in the facade. The land settlement was first observed in September 1967. Temporary measures were taken to forestall further damage, but in 1971 additional settlement occurred which did not hinder use or…

2Cases cited18 opinions

  1. Rose v. State of CaliforniaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1942
  2. Albers v. County of Los AngelesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1965
  3. Reardon v. City of San FranciscoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1885
  4. Holtz v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1970
  5. Heimann v. City of Los AngelesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1947

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

3Cited by39 opinions

  1. Sinaloa Lake Owners Ass'n v. City of Simi ValleyCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1989
  2. Varjabedian v. City of MaderaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1977
  3. Baker v. Burbank-Glendale-Pasadena Airport AuthorityCalifornia Supreme Court · 1985
  4. Levy-Zentner Co. v. SOUTHERN PAC. TRANSPORTATIONCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1977
  5. Salton Bay Marina, Inc. v. Imperial Irrigation DistrictCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1985

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

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

Powered by the Exa API