PATERNO v. STATE OF CALIFORNIA, c040553
In an action arising out of the failure of a flood control project, judgment to the district is affirmed and judgment for the state is reversed where the State, but not the District, is liable for plaintiff's damages, because of the unreasonable plan within the SRFCP which accepted the levee as built without any measures to ensure it met design standards.
- Decided 11/26/2003
- Published 11/26/2003
- California Court of Appeal
- For Appellant:
- Desmond, Nolan, Livaich & Cunningham, Gary Livaich, David Collins, and Richard F. Desmond, Sacramento, and Law Office of Clifford E. Hirsch; Howard, Rice, Nemerovski, Canady, Falk & Rabkin, Jerome B. Falk, Jr., and Simon J. Frankel, San Francisco, for First Union Real Estate Equity & Mortgage Investments; Kronick, Moskovitz, Tiedemann & Girard and Lloyd Hinkelman; Law Offices Of Stanley Bell, Sally G. Bergman; Robins, Kaplan, Miller & Ciresi, and Scott G. Johnson, Los Angeles; and Frederick A. Jacobsen for Plaintiffs and Appellants.
- For Appellees:
- Bill Lockyer, Attorney General, Andrea Hoch, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Darryl Doke, Supervising Deputy Attorney General, Sterling A. Smith, Deputy Attorney General, for State of California; G. Steven Jones, La Jolla, and Carl R. Lindmark, Yuba City, for Reclamation District 784, Defendants and Respondents.