Verdicts and Settlements

REAL PROPERTY, Nuisance – Obstruction of View

SETTLEMENT RESULT: Plaintiffs accepted Defendant’s Offer to Compromise [CCP § 998], and Defendant agreed to prune trees and vegetation so as to maintain them at or below the Plaintiffs’ defined view corridor. Each party was to bear its own attorney’s fees and costs.

CASE: Terry Allen and Christina Yeung v. Sunako Toy, et al., Case No. RG 06263897

SETTLEMENT DATE: November 2006

ATTORNEYS: Plaintiffs - Jeff Belote (Carroll, Burdick & McDonough LLP, San Francisco)
Defendant- Barri Kaplan Bonapart (Bonapart & Associates, Sausalito)

EXPERTS: Torrey Young, arborist, Treescapes, Inc., Oakland

FACTS & CONTENTIONS: This was a view dispute between neighbors, in which the plaintiffs alleged nuisance due to view obstruction under Oakland View Ordinance. Defendant owned her home for 30 years before Plaintiffs purchased their home up-slope from her in 2003. Shortly thereafter, Plaintiffs trespassed onto Defendant’s property and topped many of her trees in order to enhance their view. It was this ill-gotten view that they sought to preserve. In addition, plaintiffs sought attorney’s fees and a covenant that would run with the land of the two properties. After preemptively filing suit without attempting initial reconciliation, failing to adequately comply with discovery processes, and prematurely cancelling the mediation process, Plaintiffs finally agreed to the Defendant’s compromise terms, bearing their own attorney’s fees and costs.

<- BACK