Legal Opinion

Albers v. County of Los Angeles

California Supreme Court

Decided January 22, 1965No. L. A. No. 27930; L. A. No. 27931; L. A. Nos. 27932, 27933PublishedCited by 175 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

DOOLING, J.*

In these four consolidated actions the plaintiffs, on the theory of inverse condemnation, were *254awarded judgments aggregating $5,360,000. The county’s appeals are taken on a clerk’s transcript so that the county cannot and does not contend that the findings are not supported by the evidence. A number of the plaintiffs have also appealed from the judgments. Those appeals will be considered after disposing of the questions raised on the county’s appeals.

The litigation grows out of a major landslide which commenced in 1956, and is still continuing, in the Portuguese Bend area of the…

2Cases cited46 opinions

  1. United States v. DickinsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1947
  2. Rose v. State of CaliforniaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1942
  3. People v. RicciardiCalifornia Supreme Court · 1943
  4. Bacich v. Board of ControlCalifornia Supreme Court · 1943
  5. Eachus v. Los Angeles Consolidated Electric Railway Co.California Supreme Court · 1894

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

3Cited by175 opinions

  1. Driscoll v. City of Los AngelesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1967
  2. San Diego Gas & Electric Co. v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1996
  3. Glendale Federal Savings & Loan Ass'n v. Marina View Heights Development Co.California Court of Appeal · 1977
  4. Varjabedian v. City of MaderaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1977
  5. HFH, LTD. v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1975

170 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