 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Salyer v. 396 Investment Co.5/17/2005
t to my knowledge."
Cheong Ho, a project engineer in Anaheim's Water Engineering Division, was familiar with the June 1987 leakage test. Ho testified that no one at the city ever even discussed or considered the possibility that the 65 gallon per minute leakage could impact the surrounding area. As the trial court observed, "Anaheim produced no evidence that it undertook any study to determine what effect, if any, the leakage (65 gals/minute) might have on surrounding property."
This is an instance in which all parties providing advice or approvals at the time focused on only one of two things, i.e., money lost from escaping water, or the structural integrity of the reservoir. From the evidence, it appears that no one stopped to consider whether abandoning the underdrain system without replacing the five-foot clay liner to its original depth could have an effect on neighboring properties. In other words, the recommendations of Anaheim's experts and engineering staff were deficient in one major area - the failure to consider the impact of water flow of 34 million gallons per year on neighboring properties. It would appear that the Division of Safety of Dams gave no consideration to this issue either, and therefore its approval of the underdrain abandonment plan is insufficient to insulate Anaheim from liability.
From all indications, Anaheim focused its attention solely on itself as the purveyor of water and gave no consideration to its neighbors. In a situation such as this, common sense would dictate that Anaheim's decision makers should have given thought to the possible impact of the startling loss of 34 million gallons of water per year on adjacent properties. If they had no engineering report on the possible ramifications, they might have requested one, instead of putting on blinders and omitting to obtain a pertinent analysis.
The evidence Anaheim cites as "any substantial evidence" supporting its approval of the underdrain abandonment project plans consists of engineering recommendations and Division of Safety of Dams approvals that do not take into consideration the effect of the leakage of 34 million gallons of water per year on neighboring properties. Anaheim cites no recommendations or reports that appear to take that crucial element into consideration and therefore cites no recommendation or report on which Anaheim could reasonably rely in making its decision.
"In determining whether evidence is substantial, the question is whether the facts adduced `reasonably [inspire] confidence' and are of `solid value.' [Citation.]" (Ramirez v. City of Redondo Beach (1987) 192 Cal.App.3d 515, 526.) When a reservoir is already known to be leaking 34 million gallons per year, and the owner is warned that a one-foot thick liner is insufficient to create an adequate seal, opinions focusing solely on the structural integrity of the reservoir, without giving consideration to the impact of that remarkable leakage on neighboring properties, do not reasonably inspire confidence and are not of solid value with respect to the impact of the dangerous condition on surrounding properties. The trial court correctly determined that the third prong of the design immunity test is failed as to the underdrain system abandonment project.
D. WATER CODE SECTION 6101:
396, suing in the name of the Vista Royale , sought summary adjudication of the issue of whether Anaheim owed Vista Royale a mandatory duty under Water Code section 6101. Water Code section 6101 provides in pertinent part: " he owner of a dam or reservoir or his agent shall fully and promptly advise the department of any sudden or unprecedented flood or unusual or alarming circumstance o
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 California Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|