Quantcast

LEGAL NEWSLINE

Saturday, April 20, 2024

Court rules no inverse condemnation for California water districts in copper pipe case

Copper pipes

none needed - Pixabay

SAN DIEGO (Legal Newsline) – The California Court of Appeal, Fourth Appellate District, Division Three has shot down the appeal of a resident of Laguna Niguel that claimed the Metropolitan Water District (MWD) of Southern California damaged her copper piping.

According to the court opinion filed by Associate Justice Raymond J. Ikola, plaintiff Lisa Williams filed a lawsuit claiming MWD added a chemical to the tap water that damaged her copper pipes. The opinion states that the chemical was authorized by regulation and that "it is undisputed that the water districts complied with all statutory and regulatory standards."

The plaintiff in the case filed her complaint alleging that the water district caused a nuisance and inverse condemnation, according to the court opinion. A bifurcated bench trial was held and the judgment was entered for the MWD. The court ruled that these complaints were preempted by both state and federal laws and had no merit at the time.

Following the ruling in the lower court, Williams filed an appeal, which Ikola found again to have no merit, awarding judgment again to MWD. The case, which was moved to a class action suit, also involved Irvine Ranch Water District, Moulton Niguel Water District, and several plaintiffs that had similar complaints as Williams.

The court of appeals assessed the complaints filed by Williams and the other plaintiffs, looking at whether the water districts were bound by the federal Safe Drinking Water Act as well as the California Safe Drinking Water Act. According to the court opinion by Ikola, the court found in favor of the water districts in regards to the Water Acts.

The appeals court also evaluated whether inverse condemnation liability occurred because of the pinhole leaks found in the defendants piping. Again, Ikola ruled in favor of the water districts. 

"We decline to be the first court to allow such a free-ranging theory of tort liability under the guise of inverse condemnation,” the ruling states.

ORGANIZATIONS IN THIS STORY

More News