Los Angeles Unified School Dist. v. Coinmach Corp.
Filed 5/15/06 Los Angeles Unified School Dist. v. Coinmach Corp. CA2/7
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS
California Rules of Court, rule 977(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 977(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT
DIVISION SEVEN
LOS ANGELES UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT, Plaintiff, Respondent and Cross-Appellant, v. COINMACH CORPORATION, et al., Defendants, Appellants and Cross-Respondents. | B183727 (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. SA047404) |
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County. William F. McDonald, Judge. (Retired judge of the L.A. Sup. Ct. assigned by the Chief Justice pursuant to art. VI, § 6 of the Cal. Const.) Reversed and remanded with directions.
Woollacott Jannol and Jay A. Woollacott for Defendants, Appellants and Cross-Respondents Coinmach Corp. and All Valley Washer Service, Inc.
Nossaman, Guthner, Knox & Elliott, K. Erik Friess and Katherine A. Contreras for Plaintiff, Respondent and Cross-Appellant Los Angeles Unified School District.
___________________________
SUMMARY
The parties in an eminent domain action agreed to a general reference, and the referee prepared a statement of decision awarding compensation to the condemnees for the value of their leasehold interests, based on what the referee found to be the fair market value of these interests. After the condemnor objected to the referee's statement of decision in the trial court, rather than entering judgment on the referee's statement of decision, the trial court remanded the matter back to the referee to analyze instead whether the condemnees had met the statutory requirements for compensation for â€
