Legal Opinion

Clay v. City of Los Angeles

California Court of Appeal

Decided November 29, 1971No. Civ. 38139PublishedCited by 22 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

COMPTON, J.

Is a homeowner entitled to redress in the courts for the failure of a municipality to take any action by way of either restoring, or vacating with just compensation to the homeowner, a city street which has been washed out by flood, when the circumstances are such that the homeowner’s property has been rendered totally inaccessible?

Plaintiffs Mr. and Mrs. Clay (hereinafter plaintiffs) claim that they are entitled to such redress and attempted to assert their claim by filing a complaint for damages against the City of Los Angeles (hereinafter defendant), an action which is…

2Cases cited35 opinions

  1. Rose v. State of CaliforniaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1942
  2. Bacich v. Board of ControlCalifornia Supreme Court · 1943
  3. Eachus v. Los Angeles Consolidated Electric Railway Co.California Supreme Court · 1894
  4. County of San Diego v. California Water & Telephone Co.California Supreme Court · 1947
  5. Breidert v. Southern Pacific Co.California Supreme Court · 1964

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

3Cited by22 opinions

  1. Ehlinger v. StateSupreme Court of Iowa · 1976
  2. City of Lafayette v. County of Contra CostaCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1979
  3. Ellison v. Ventura Port DistrictCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1978
  4. Cardoza v. Town of Silver CityNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 1981
  5. Burg v. City of SeattleCourt of Appeals of Washington · 1982

17 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