This is the property of the Daily Journal Corporation and fully protected by copyright. It is made available only to Daily Journal subscribers for personal or collaborative purposes and may not be distributed, reproduced, modified, stored or transferred without written permission. Please click "Reprint" to order presentation-ready copies to distribute to clients or use in commercial marketing materials or for permission to post on a website. and copyright (showing year of publication) at the bottom.

Real Property
Condominium Project
Flooding

Orangewood Village Homeowners Association, et al. v. City of Long Beach, et al.

Published: Sep. 16, 1995 | Result Date: May 18, 1995 | Filing Date: Jan. 1, 1900 |

Case number: BC083096 –  $376,000

Judge

David A. Workman

Court

L.A. Superior Central


Attorneys

Plaintiff

Major Alan Langer

Jonathan A. Bornstein


Defendant

Paul I. Yoshinaga

Michael M. Peters M.D.


Experts

Plaintiff

Manny Shahraki
(technical)

Hugh McCormick
(technical)

Theodore A. Wendland
(technical)

Lawrence R. Wlezien
(technical)

Defendant

Ralph Laurain
(technical)

Kenneth Lewis
(technical)

Robert M. Pride
(technical)

R. Dean Colin
(technical)

Facts

In 1991 construction and occupancy were completed on a condominium project involving 21 units. Plaintiff residents were the members of the Orangewood Village Homeowners Association. The average price range at purchase was from $130,000 to $145,000. On December 7, 1992, flooding caused extensive damage to Plaintiffs' residents.

Settlement Discussions

Defendant City of Long Beach contends it would have offered $650,000 and Plaintiff demanded $3,000,000 reduced to $925,000 during trial.

Damages

The claimed damages were: $680,000 (approximately) for structural repairs; $200,000 for personal property and attorney fees (based on inverse condemnation); and $1,000,000 (approximately) for loss of fair market value to condominiums.

Other Information

Defendants Los Angeles County and Los Angeles Flood Control District were granted nonsuits, early in this litigation. The first phase of the trial resulted in a verdict for the Plaintiffs on the cause of action based on nuisance; however, this resulted in a Defense verdict on the causes of action based on negligence and/or dangerous condition of public property. The jury also returned a special finding in the form of an advisory opinion which should have allowed a decision in Plaintiffs' favor on the theory of inverse condemnation. Judge Workman, however, ruled against the Plaintiffs on the theory of inverse condemnation and found for the Defendants on that theory which eliminated Plaintiffs' claim for attorney fees, expert fees, et cetera. A settlement has been reached, but not yet approved by the Plaintiffs, for a total sum of $568,000 to compromise for a release of all floods (2 subsequent flood incidents) and agreement not to appeal the issue of inverse condemnation.

Deliberation

8 days (first phase), 11 days (second phase)

Poll

varied

Length

2.5 months


#109030

For reprint rights or to order a copy of your photo:

Email jeremy@reprintpros.com for prices.
Direct dial: 949-702-5390