Legal Opinion

Breidert v. Southern Pacific Co.

California Supreme Court

Decided August 20, 1964No. L. A. No. 27222PublishedCited by 118 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtTobriner, J.

In this case of inverse condemnation we must decide whether a property owner who loses the use of the next intersecting street which affords him access to the general system of public streets should be compensated. As we point out, although the bare allegation of a cul-de-sac does not in itself suffice to establish a compensable right, a showing of a substantial impairment of the property owner’s right of access to the system of public streets does so. Since the complaint in this case alleges such substantial impairment, it withstands a general demurrer.

Plaintiffs are, respectively, the…

2Cases cited22 opinions

  1. Rose v. State of CaliforniaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1942
  2. People v. RicciardiCalifornia Supreme Court · 1943
  3. Bacich v. Board of ControlCalifornia Supreme Court · 1943
  4. Eachus v. Los Angeles Consolidated Electric Railway Co.California Supreme Court · 1894
  5. City of Oakland v. Pacific Coast Lumber & Mill Co.California Supreme Court · 1915

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

3Cited by118 opinions

  1. DuPuy v. City of WacoTexas Supreme Court · 1965
  2. Paterno v. StateCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1999
  3. Varjabedian v. City of MaderaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1977
  4. Harman v. City and County of San FranciscoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1972
  5. Customer Co. v. City of SacramentoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1995

113 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