Ruling Requires Reversal of Litigation Expenses Award, $57,224.50 Of Which Was Attorney’s Fees.
People ex rel. Dept. of Transp. v. Superior Court (Menigoz), Case No. C069391 (3d Dist. Mar. 1, 2012) (certified for publication) is one for our eminent domain readers.
In this one, DOT accepted property owners’ final demand of $189,000 for compensation several days before a scheduled trial, resulting in a stipulated condemnation judgment. (DOT’s final offer was $159,000, so the parties were only $30,000 apart before DOT accepted owners’ final demand.) The trial court then awarded litigation expenses to property owners under Code of Civil Procedure section 1250.410, which included $57,224.50 in fees. (Section 1250.410 is a discretionary eminent domain fee-shifting statute to encourage government to reasonably evaluate the respective final demands/offers, but allowing the court to award fees and certain specified expenses, including expert witness expense, to property owner if the government rejected a reasonable demand from owner.)
DOT filed a writ of mandate, which was issued by the Third District in a 3-0 opinion so as to overturn the litigation expenses award against DOT.
The Third District determined that eminent domain litigation expenses only kicked in if evidence was admitted at trial and there was a resulting award of compensation. “The focus of the statute is a case in which the government’s unreasonable conduct forces the matter to trial.” The appellate court distinguished a different result reached in Coachella Valley County Water Dist. v. Dreyfuss, 91 Cal.App.3d 949, 957 (1979) because a trial had actually commenced in that matter. Here, no trial commenced, no evidence was admitted, and no award was reached, resulting in no basis to award litigation expenses under the statute.
Comments