Homeowners brought inverse condemnation action, seeking damages and injunctive relief after city planted trees in park which impaired their views.
The Superior Court sustained city’s demurrer, and homeowners appealed.
The Court of Appeal held that:
- Loss of view was not a compensable taking, and
- Speculative risk that trees might catch fire was sufficient to a constitute a taking.
Loss of view due to trees which city planted in neighboring park was not a compensable taking of homeowners’ property absent any physical intrusion, occupation, or invasion of their property or any physical damage to their property.
Speculative risk that trees planted in neighboring park might catch fire was insufficient to a constitute an inverse condemnation of homeowners’ properties.