Whiting v. City of Pasadena

FLEMING, J. Whiting appeals from a summary judgment which dismissed his complaint to quiet title and declared valid a special assessment lien of the City of Pasadena against his property.

In February 1965 Whiting purchased a lot in Pasadena at a trustee’s sale. In October 1965 the city notified him that a special assessment of $947 was due on the lot, a sum which represented the cost of demolishing a house on the lot in 1964 in proceedings under Pasadena Ordinance No. 4590. Whiting filed suit in the superior court to quiet title, asking [370]that the City of Pasadena be barred from asserting its lien against the property because of its failure to record the order for demolition as required by the ordinance. Both parties moved for summary judgment, and the motion of the city was granted.

In demolishing the house the City of Pasadena acted under a 1962 ordinance which adopted with certain modifications the 1961 Edition of the Uniform Housing Code of the International Conference of Building Officials. The stated goals of the ordinance were to prevent the spread of substandard housing and to eliminate blight. The ordinance declared that buildings found to be substandard within the definition of the Code were public nuisances, and set out procedures for their abatement. Section 5(a) read: “(a) The Enforcement Officer shall examine . . . every building . . . reported to be substandard and if such is found to be a substandard building . . . shall give to the owner . . . written notice stating the defects thereof . . . Designated period within which said owner or person in charge is required to comply with the order . . . shall begin as of the date of receipt of such notice. Enforcement Officer may also file with the office of the County Recorder ... a certificate that the building described is a substandard building. Upon correction of such deficiencies . . . the Enforcement officer shall file a certificate with the County Recorder . . . that the said building is no longer a substandard building.” Section 6 created a Housing Advisory and Appeals Board and provided: “(B)(1)(b) The [Housing] Board shall conduct a hearing on any proposed demolition.” Section 6(B)(7) declared: “A copy of the order to vacate, repair, rehabilitate, or demolish and remove any structure shall be posted at the entrance to the building, and shall be served . . . upon all persons to whom the notice of hearing is required to be served. A copy shall be recorded in the office of the County Recorder. ’ ’

If an order of the housing board or the enforcement officer has not been complied with, section 6(C) states: “(1) The Board of Directors . . . may order the Enforcement Officer to proceed with the work specified in such order. A statement of the cost . . . shall be transmitted to the Board of Directors who shall cause the same to be paid and levied as a special assessment against the property. (2) ... costs shall be charged to the owner of the premises involved as a special assessment on the land on which the building or structure is located and shall be collected in the planner pro* yjded for special assessments, ’ ’