Can a plaintiff in an inverse condemnation action bring a claim against the state for the costs of defending the action?

Plaintiffs reason that, since the right to bring an inverse condemnation action is subsumed within the right to just compensation (Rose v. State (1942) 19 Cal.2d 713, 719-724, 123 P.2d 505), one who is forced to initiate a suit to enforce the right to compensation may not be burdened with the state's costs if the suit, although in good faith, is unsuccessful. Just as a defendant in an action for eminent domain is entitled to costs in defending the action, the plaintiff in inverse condemnation must be free of expenses imposed as a result of exercising rights granted by article I, section 19.