Legal Opinion

Yee v. City of Sausalito

California Court of Appeal

Decided April 15, 1983No. Civ. 52166PublishedCited by 26 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

LOW, P. J.

The question before us is whether inverse liability can be imposed on a city for property damage arising from the failure of a public improvement to operate as originally intended. Under the circumstances of this case, we hold it can. Accordingly, we reverse the judgment.

Plaintiff Nathan Yee appeals from a summary judgment entered in favor of defendant City of Sausalito. In plaintiff’s first amended complaint for inverse condemnation, he alleged that a storm drainage system, running along the westerly side of Bulkley Avenue, ruptured, allowing surface water to seep into…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Albers v. County of Los AngelesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1965
  2. Varjabedian v. City of MaderaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1977
  3. Bauer v. County of VenturaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1955
  4. Powers Farms, Inc. v. Consolidated Irrigation DistrictCalifornia Supreme Court · 1941
  5. Sheffet v. County of Los AngelesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1970

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

3Cited by26 opinions

  1. Paterno v. StateCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1999
  2. Belair v. Riverside County Flood Control DistrictCalifornia Supreme Court · 1988
  3. Customer Co. v. City of SacramentoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1995
  4. Stonewall Insurance v. City of Palos Verdes EstatesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1996
  5. McMahan's of Santa Monica v. City of Santa MonicaCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1983

21 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