Youngsma v. City of Cypress CA4/3

Filed 5/6/25 Youngsma v. City of Cypress CA4/3

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS

California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION THREE

BOB R. YOUNGSMA et al.,

Plaintiffs and Appellants, G063736

v. (Super. Ct. No. 30-2021-01220176)

CITY OF CYPRESS, OPINION

Defendant and Respondent.

Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of Orange County, Randall J. Sherman, Judge. Affirmed. Geurts Law Firm and Phillip R. Geurts for Plaintiffs and Appellants. Aleshire & Wynder, Fred Galante, Michael R. Linden, Michael C. Huston and Erika D. Green for Defendant and Respondent. * * *

Appellants are homeowners who claim the City of Cypress created and maintained a nuisance near their properties. The trial court granted the City’s motion for judgment on the pleadings, without leave to amend, concluding the complaint did not state causes of action for inverse condemnation or public nuisance, the two causes of action alleged against the City. Appellants contend this was error. We disagree and affirm the judgment.

STATEMENT OF FACTS Appellants sued the City for inverse condemnation and public nuisance. They contend the construction of a vehicle maintenance and repair facility on property near their homes, property which was previously used as an elementary school, caused them significant harm including loss of value to their homes and interference with the comfortable use and enjoyment of their properties. Appellants alleged in the second amended complaint the Cypress School District, a separate entity, “owns, runs, and exclusively controls, manages, and supervises” the property in question. In 2011, the District closed the elementary school located on the property. In 2018, the City and the District agreed to work on a “Facilities Maintenance Plan” aimed at improving various school sites. Sometime after this, a vehicle maintenance and repair facility was built on the property “without public hearings or approval of Cypress City Council or any other Cypress City agencies.” The City never approved or authorized the District to use the property as a vehicle maintenance and repair facility. Appellants requested the City review the District’s plans, but the City did not do so. As alleged, the City never “made any decision regarding [the District’s] land use.”