1991-12-09 Public Hearing, Citizens Participation Meeting, and Regular Meeting

Browse Search

e 85-1199-0PINION e FIRST LUTHERAN CHURCH v. LOS ANGELES COUNTY 3 leging that the county's ordinance denied all use of Lutherglen, on the view that the California Supreme Court's decision in Agins v. Tiburon, 24 Cal. 3d 266, 598 P. 2d 25 (1979), aff'd on other grounds, 447 U. S. 255 (1980), rendered the allegation "entirely immaterial and irrelevant(, with] no bearing upon any conceivable cause of action herein." App. 22. See Cal. Civ. Proc. Code Ann. ~ 436 (West Supp. 1987) ("The court may. . . strike out any irrelevant, false, or im- proper matter inserted in any pleading"). Iri Agins v. Tiburon, supra, the Supreme Court of Califor- nia decided that a landowner may not maintain an inverse condemnation suit in the courts of that State based upon a "regulatory" taking. 24 Cal. 3d, at 275-277, 598 P. 2d, at 29-31. In the court's view, maintenance of such a suit would allow a landowner to force the legislature to exercise its power of eminent domain. Under this decision, then, com- pensation is not required until the challenged regulation or ordinance has been held excessive in an action for declaratory relief or a writ of mandamus and the government has never- theless decided to continue the regulation in effect. Based on. this decision, the trial court in the present case granted the motion to strike the allegation that the church had been denied all use of Lutherglen. It explained that "a careful re- reading of the Agins case persuades the Court that when an ordinance, even a non-zoning ordinance, deprives a person of the total use of his lands, his challenge to the ordinance is by way of declaratory relief or possibly mandamus." App. 26. Because the a.ppellant alleged a regulatory taking and sought only damages, the allegation that the ordinance denied all use of Lutherglen was deemed irrelevant. Z · The trial court also granted deCendants' motion Cor judgment on the pleadings on the second cause oC action, based on cloud seeding. It limited trial on the first cause oC action for damages under Cal. Gov't Code Ann. f 835 (West 1980), rejecting the inverse condemnation claim. At the close of plainttff's evidence, the trial court granted a nonsuit on behalf oC defend- ants, dismissing the entire complaint.