People v. Norwalk Steakhouse CA2/2
Filed 10/20/15 P. v. Norwalk Steakhouse CA2/2 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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
SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT
DIVISION TWO
THE PEOPLE ex rel. DEPARTMENT OF B258576 TRANSPORTATION, (Los Angeles County Plaintiff and Respondent, Super. Ct. No. NC057875)
v.
NORWALK STEAKHOUSE, INC., et al.,
Defendants and Appellants.
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County. Ross M. Klein, Judge. Affirmed.
Nossaman and Richard E. Rayl for Defendants and Appellants.
Jeanne E. Scherer, Acting Chief Counsel, Jerald M. Montoya, Deputy Chief Counsel; Iris A. Malsman, Daniel M. Mansueto, and Mark A. Berkebile for Plaintiff and Respondent.
_________________________
The landowner in this eminent domain case contends that the trial court erred in finding as a matter of law that the landowner was not entitled to compensation for severance damages and business goodwill losses. Because the landowner has not demonstrated what evidence of such damages it would have presented, we find no error and affirm the judgment. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND The Complaint and Answers On July 16, 2012, plaintiff and respondent the People of the State of California, acting by and through the Department of Transportation (Caltrans), filed a complaint in eminent domain against defendants and appellants Norwalk Steakhouse, Inc. and Norwalk Steakhouse, L.P. (collectively Norwalk).1 The complaint seeks to acquire by eminent domain two parcels of land in fee and two temporary construction easements, which are to cease and terminate no later than December 1, 2016. Norwalk Steakhouse, Inc. and Norwalk Steakhouse, L.P. filed separate answers. Norwalk Steakhouse, Inc. alleged that it is the owner in fee simple absolute and in possession of the property alleged in the complaint, on which it operates a restaurant (Outback Steakhouse). Norwalk Steakhouse, L.P. alleged that it is in possession of the property, operates a restaurant on the property, and owns a leasehold interest in the property. Norwalk Steakhouse, Inc. and Norwalk Steakhouse, L.P. both claimed entitlement to severance damages and lost business goodwill. As clarified elsewhere in the record, the multi-year construction project relates to improvements on the Interstate 5 freeway, including widening the freeway and adding an off-ramp. The two parcels to be taken consist of a total of 556 square feet and the two easements consist of a total of 2,571 square feet. The property is located on Norwalk Boulevard in the city of Norwalk, next to the freeway, and has a total of 64,282 square feet. The “take” area is less than two percent of the total property.
More from California Court of Appeal
- People v. Hill (1998)
- In Re Autumn H. (1994)
- Nwosu v. Uba (2004)
- In Re Casey D. (1999)
- Santisas v. Goodin (1998)
- Cahill v. San Diego Gas & Electric Co. (2011)
- People v. Rivera (2015)
- People v. Barnett (1998)
- People v. Serrano (2012)
- Benach v. County of Los Angeles (2007)