LOS ANGELES UNIFIED
DISTRICT v. CASASOLA
Filed 8/5/10
CERTIFIED FOR PUBLICATION
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT
DIVISION FOUR
LOS ANGELES UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT,
Plaintiff and Respondent,
v.
RUDY CASASOLA et al.,
Defendants and Appellants.
B215465
(Los Angeles County
Super. Ct. No. BC351374)
STORY CONTINUE
FROM PART I….
2. The California Relocation Assistance Act (Gov.
Code, § 7260 et seq.)
The California
Relocation Assistance Act, codified as Government Code section 7260 et seq.,
provides for administrative recovery for moving and related expenses incurred
by individuals and businesses displaced by public projects. (§ 7262;
As relevant here, section 7262
provides:
â€
| Description | Respondent Los Angeles Unified School District (the District) acquired by eminent domain property on which appellants Rudy and Teresa Casasola (the Casasolas) operated a small business. The Casasolas relocated their business to a new, larger property and spent nearly $1.4 million moving their equipment and repurposing the new property to accommodate their business. They then sought reimbursement from the District for their relocation expenses. The District paid the Casasolas $224,252 in moving and reestablishment expenses, but rejected the remainder of the claim. The Casasolas challenge this determination on appeal, contending that their reasonable relocation expenses are reimbursable as expenses incurred to mitigate loss of business goodwill. They also challenge the trial court's award to the District of $180,000 in penalties, contending that the penalties are unconscionable. Court affirm. |
| Rating |
