REGENCY OUTDOOR ADVERTISING, INC v. CITY OF LOS ANGELES
Filed 8/7/06
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF CALIFORNIA
REGENCY OUTDOOR ) ADVERTISING, INC., )
)
v. )
Defendants and Respondents. ) Super. Ct. No. YC037625
__________________________________ )
As part of a roadway beautification project in advance of the 2000 Democratic National Convention, the City of Los Angeles (City) planted a number of palm trees on City-owned property along a public street. Plaintiff Regency Outdoor Advertising, Inc. (Regency) claims that the trees made several of its roadside billboards less visible, at least as seen from particular perspectives along the boulevard. Regency asserts that the City must compensate it for the allegedly lessened value of its billboards pursuant to inverse condemnation principles, as well as under state law concerning billboards specifically. The superior court conducted a bench trial on Regency's inverse condemnation claim, ultimately ruling against the firm. The trial court then awarded the City costs and expert witness fees pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 998, with this award including an amount attributable to expert witness fees that the City incurred before, as well as after, it extended its offer to compromise.
When Regency appealed, the Court of Appeal affirmed, resolving the inverse condemnation issue by determining that the property right for which Regency demands compensation--the right to be seen from a public way--simply does not exist under the circumstances presented. The Court of Appeal also rebuffed Regency's reliance on state law pertaining to billboards, reasoning that the planting of palm trees near Regency's displays did not mean that the billboards had been â€
