|
p0257 REVIEW DENIED An Evidence Code section permitting use of the price a government entity paid for acquiring other property for a public use that it could have taken by eminent domain as evidence of value in an eminent domain proceeding if the acquisition of the other property was for the same public use for which it could have been taken by eminent domain was held to apply only to property that a government entity seeks to condemn after it was already put to a public use by another entity.CitationEMERYVILLE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY v HARCROS (Condemnation Evidence) 101 CA4 1083 [See: EvC 822; SD County Water Auth v Mireiter 18 CA4 1808; City and County of SF v Golden Gate 14 CA4 1203; City of LA v Decker 18 C3 860]
|
