MANTA MANAGEMENT CORPORATION v.
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO
Filed 5/11/06
CERTIFIED FOR PUBLICATION
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT
DIVISION TWO
| MANTA MANAGEMENT CORPORATION, Cross-complainant and Respondent, v. CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, Cross-defendant and Appellant. | E036942 (Super.Ct.No. SCVSS18157) OPINION |
APPEAL from the Superior Court of San Bernardino County. Donald R. Alvarez, Judge. Affirmed.
Arias, Lockwood & Gray, Arias Aaen, Joseph Arias, Christopher D. Lockwood and Laura Tall Liu, for Cross-defendant and Appellant.
Roger J. Diamond for Cross-complainant and Respondent.
INTRODUCTION
The City of San Bernardino (the city) appeals from a judgment in the amount of $1.4 million, representing damages incurred by Manta Management Corporation (Manta) as a result of a preliminary injunction the city obtained to enforce a zoning ordinance prohibiting Manta's operation of an adult cabaret. The preliminary injunction was dissolved after this court upheld the trial court's ruling which declared the zoning ordinance unconstitutional, and the California Supreme Court denied review.
The city contends that damages are available for a wrongfully issued preliminary injunction only if a bond has been posted or if the party wrongfully enjoined prevails in a separate action for malicious prosecution. Manta contends that the trial court correctly found that it is entitled to recover damages resulting from the injunction, despite the absence of an injunction bond, via its cross-complaint for violation of its civil rights pursuant to section 1983 of title 42 of the United States Code.
The city also contends that the award of damages is not supported by substantial evidence because there was no factual basis for separating legal profits from profits derived from illegal activities (i.e., prostitution), and that the trial court improperly placed the burden of identifying â€
