Clary v. City of Crescent City

Defendant city was not barred from imposing a lien on plaintiff’s property to pay for the cost of abating nuisance caused by absentee landowner plaintiff’s failure to maintain the yard.

This decision upholds a lien that the defendant city imposed on plaintiff’s property to pay for the cost of abating the nuisance on the property.  Plaintiff had not maintained the yard and it became overgrown with weeds and filled with trash.  There was no merit to plaintiff’s many constitutional and other challenges to the city’s actions and its lien.

California Court of Appeal, First District, Division 2 (Stewart, J.); March 30, 2017 (published May 1, 2017); 2017 WL 1174412

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s