Logourl black
From our private database of 14,100+ case briefs...

City of Stockton v. Superior Court

California Supreme Court
171 P.3d 20 (2007)


Facts

Civic Partners Stockton, LLC (Civic) (plaintiff) entered into an agreement with the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Stockton (Agency) (defendant) involving the rehabilitation of Hotel Stockton. Civic also leased the upper floors of the hotel to the City of Stockton (City) for office space. The City later repudiated the lease, and the Agency entered into a new agreement with a different company to rehabilitate Hotel Stockton. The new agreement conflicted with Civic’s agreement. The City and the Agency allegedly assured Civic that they would protect Civic’s interests, but they did not. Civic sued the City and the Agency. Civic did not present any claims to the City or the Agency notifying them about potential litigation before Civic filed the lawsuit. The City and the Agency filed two successful, or demurrers, and the court let Civic file amended complaints to fix the issues raised in those two motions. The first two motions did not complain about Civic’s failure to present a claim prior to filing suit. However, the City and the Agency then demurred to Civic’s second amended complaint on the grounds that Civic had failed to comply with its obligation to present a claim to these local public entities prior to filing suit. The trial court denied this motion, finding that the pre-litigation claim-presentation requirement did not apply to contractual claims. The California Court of Appeal reversed. Civic then petitioned the California Supreme Court for review.

Rule of Law

The rule of law is the black letter law upon which the court rested its decision.

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

Issue

The issue section includes the dispositive legal issue in the case phrased as a question.

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

Holding and Reasoning (Corrigan, J.)

The holding and reasoning section includes:

  • A "yes" or "no" answer to the question framed in the issue section;
  • A summary of the majority or plurality opinion, using the CREAC method; and
  • The procedural disposition (e.g. reversed and remanded, affirmed, etc.).

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 97,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Vanderbilt, Berkeley, and the University of Illinois—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students. Read our student testimonials.

  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students. Read more about Quimbee.

Here's why 218,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 14,100 briefs, keyed to 189 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.