Real Estate/Development
Nov. 30, 2011
Does snooping for the Coastal Commission mean never having to say you’re sorry?
The "private necessity" doctrine may be twisted to give trespassers a pass. By Paul J. Beard II and Jennifer M. Fry of the Pacific Legal Foundation
Will the California Coastal Commission be allowed to use trespassers as informants when it's looking to justify some kind of action against a property owner? Will California courts give the "private necessity" doctrine a new - and unjustified - twist, to give the trespassers a pass if they're sued?
These are the issues at stake as the state Supreme Court is being asked to review the case of N...
To continue reading, please subscribe.
For only $95 a month (the price of 2 article purchases)
Receive unlimited article access and full access to our archives,
Daily Appellate Report, award winning columns, and our
Verdicts and Settlements.
Or
$795 for an entire year!
For only $95 a month (the price of 2 article purchases)
Receive unlimited article access and full access to our archives,
Daily Appellate Report, award winning columns, and our
Verdicts and Settlements.
Or
$795 for an entire year!
Or access this article for $45
(Purchase provides 7-day access to this article. Printing, posting or downloading is not allowed.)
Already a subscriber?
Sign In