In Boxer v. City of Beverly Hills, published April 26, 2016, the Second District Court of Appeal, Division 1 affirmed a trial court's order dismissal on demurrer of an inverse condemnation action. The plaintiff homeowners alleged that redwood trees planted in a nearby city park in 1989 had grown and impaired their view from their property. They asserted that this impairment was a taking of their property rights that was actionable in inverse condemnation. They relied on cases holding that impairment of view was a compensable loss in inverse condemnation cases.
The appellate court held that impairment of view is not a taking of property rights. In the cases the plaintiffs relied upon, there was a physical invasion into, or impairment of access to, the plaintiffs' property. There is no property right to a particular view from one's property that is enforceable in inverse condemnation. Further, cities have a right to plant trees on city property.
Comments