RED MOUNTAIN, LLC v. FALLBROOK PUBLIC UTILITY DISTRICT PART-III
Civil Code Sec. 1069--which states that "every grant by a public officer or body...is to be interpreted in favor of the grantor"--requires a court to interpret an ambiguous grant by a public body in favor of the grantor even where other rules of construction or extrinsic evidence support an interpretation in favor of the grantee. Trial court's error in not construing easement in favor of grantor public utilities district was prejudicial where reasonably probable that had court done so--so as to limit grant to personal ingress and egress of grantee--court would not have found that district's refusal to grant easement resulted in an inverse condemnation, and jury would have found district's refusal to grant the easement was not a breach of agreement. Where a main disputed issue at trial was the highest and best use of the subject property and whether a subdivision development on the property was feasible, trial court did not abuse its discretion in allowing the jury to hear various valuations of the property based on evidence that land was suitable for a subdivision development.
Comments on RED MOUNTAIN, LLC v. FALLBROOK PUBLIC UTILITY DISTRICT PART-III