Sierra Palms Homeowners Assoc. v. Metro Gold Line Extension Construction Authority, No. B275241 (D2d7 Jan. 29, 2018).
California has an inefficient rule that if a demurrer is granted against you, you can argue for the first time on appeal that you should have been afforded leave to amend. Indeed, the standard is codified expressly into Code of Civil Procedure § 472c(a). And that’s what happens here. On remand, Plaintiff gets to amend to add an inverse condemnation claim against one of the Defendants, even though it never requested that relief in superior court.
Reversed.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
We've Moved ....
After a two-year hiatus, 111 North Hill Street has decided to decamp for Substack. Thank you for your readership over the last twelve year...
-
Soto v. Borgwarner Morse Tec Inc. , No. B252995 (D2d4, as modified August 20, 2015) Although some law-and-economics attuned federal judges...
-
The Rossdale Grp. v. Walton , No. H043476 (D6 Apr. 15, 2017) This is a weird and kind of narrow opinion about standing that is mostly shap...
No comments:
Post a Comment