California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from Kong v. City of Hawaiian Gardens Redevelopment Agency, 108 Cal.App.4th 1028, 134 Cal.Rptr.2d 260 (Cal. App. 2002):
In City of Vista v. Fielder, supra, 13 Cal.4th 612, 54 Cal.Rptr.2d 861, 919 P.2d 151, the court was faced with the question of whether "a provision of a lease that declares that the lease terminates if all the property subject thereto is acquired for public use deprive[s] the lessee of any right he may have to compensation for the taking of his leasehold or other property[.]" (At p. 614, 54 Cal.Rptr.2d 861, 919 P.2d 151.) The court held that termination of a lease "does not affect any right of the lessee to compensation related thereto." These rules, however, "may indeed be displaced by a provision of a lease to the contrary." (Id. at p. 618, 54 Cal. Rptr .2d 861, 919 P.2d 151.)
Plaintiff argues that paragraph 40 "is not a limitation" but rather "clarifies the right to compensation." Moreover, the parties intended "to insure that goodwill was compensable and not to limit any other rights to recover compensation." Defendants, on the other hand, argue that paragraph 40 limits the condemnation damages plaintiff may recover to loss of goodwill. In this case, the language in paragraph 40 conflicts with the applicable portion of paragraph 13. Thus, to the extent that paragraph 40 displaces the language in paragraph 13, it limits plaintiffs recovery for condemnation to loss of goodwill.
[134 Cal.Rptr.2d 271]
(City of Vista v. Fielder, supra, 13 Cal.4th at p. 618, 54 Cal.Rptr.2d 861, 919 P.2d 151.)
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.