Supreme Court of California

An appointment of a receiver and a decision by the plaintiff to demolish the defendant's house and sell the property as authorized under sections 17980.6 and 17980.7 is affirmed where: 1) the defendant was statutorily entitled to notice that failure to correct the substandard condition of his property might result in the appointment of a receiver and the plaintiff duly afforded that notice; 2) there was no violation of due process since the defendant had been on notice for years regarding the uninhabitable condition of his property and the various code violations and had been given ample opportunity for a hearing and to correct the violations; 3) the court adopts a standard of review for orders authorizing the receiver to contract for demolition requiring the court-s sound discretion exercised in view of all the surrounding facts and circumstances and in the interest of fairness, justice and the rights of the respective parties; and 4) the plaintiff did not abuse its discretion when it chose to demolish the house.

Appellate Information

• Decided 05/19/2008
• Published 05/19/2008

Judges

• BAXTER, J.

Court

• Supreme Court of California

Counsel

• For Appellees:
  
• The Law Office of Stan Stern and Stan Stern, Santa Monica, for Defendant and Appellant and for Petitioner., Marsha Jones Moutrie, City Attorney, and Adam Radinsky, Deputy City Attorney, for Plaintiff and Respondent and for Real Party in Interest., Mark S. Adams, as Amicus Curiae on behalf of Plaintiff and Respondent and Real Party in Interest., Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher, Scott A. Edelman, Brett H. Oberst, Michael E. Byerts, Los Angeles, Karmen C. Schmid, Michael Anthony Brown, San Francisco;  Michelle Williams Court, Los Angeles, Mitchell A. Kamin, Wendy Marantz Levine, Elissa Barrett;  Betsy Handler;  Toby J. Rothschild, Long Beach, T.E. Glenn;  Steve Arredondo, Naeli Jeon;  David S. Pallack, Pacoima, Stephanie E. Haffner;  Daniel Grunfeld, Lisa Jaskol;  Gary B. McGaha, Kenneth W. Babock and Alexis A. Penn-Loya for Bet Tzedek Legal Services, Coalition for Economic Survival, Inner City Law Center, Inquilinos Unidos, Legal Aid Foundation of Los Angeles, Los Angeles Center for Law and Justice, Neighborhood Legal Services of Los Angeles County, Public Counsel, Public Law Center and SAJE as Amici Curiae on behalf of Plaintiff and Respondent and Real Party in Interest., No appearance for Respondent Superior Court., David J. Pasternak as Receiver and Respondent.