California Court of Appeal

Reset A A Font size: Print

Howard v. County of San Diego, D055419

In plaintiffs' suit against a county claiming that the county inversely condemned their property when it allegedly refused to process plans for a metal barn on their property, because its location was in the footprint of a potential road, grant of county's motion for judgment on the pleadings and dismissal of the complaint is reversed where: 1) the trial court erred in refusing to grant leave to amend because an issue of fact exists as to whether the county's decision was "final" and whether any further attempt by plaintiffs to exhaust their administrative remedies would be futile; and 2) if what plaintiffs seek to accomplish regarding development of their property can only be remedied through a general plan amendment, they have adequately exhausted their administrative remedies because a general plan amendment is a legislative, not administrative, process.

Appellate Information

  • Decided 05/26/2010
  • Published 05/26/2010



  • California Court of Appeal


Copied to clipboard