Two cases from different appellate districts in California have come to different conclusions about the enforceability of co-tenancy provisions. This article describes co-tenancy provisions, discusses liquidated damages and alternative performance, and then reviews Grand Prospect and JJD in detail to compare the reasoning in each case.
The Second District Court of Appeal’s decision in Canyon Vineyard Estates I, LLC v. DeJoria1 (see summary at page 544, below) sidesteps several potentially troublesome conveyancing issues by focusing on the statutory authorization for “conservation easements” and giving only limited attention to more prosaic principles of traditional California real property law.
California’s continuing shortfall of new housing to meet demand has led to the enactment of a number of measures at the state level to encourage housing development and to limit the grounds for local governments to disapprove or excessively condition particular projects.
The use of private covenants governing the use, improvement, and occupancy of real property has a long and sometimes checkered history in California, as it does throughout the nation.
Addressing an issue of first impression in California, the Court of Appeal for the Second District has confirmed that businesses compelled to cease operations as a result of governmental directives issued in response to the COVID-19 pandemic cannot look to their property insurance carriers to cover the lost business income.
On September 16, 2021, Governor Newsom signed two bills that take effect on January 1, 2022, and are intended to foster more intensive residential development in existing single-family zoned areas.