Paterno V. State

Property owners sued the State of California (the State, which includes the Sacramento and San Joaquin Drainage District), Reclamation District 784 (the District) and others no longer in the case, seeking damages after a levee failed. Sample plaintiffs (Paterno) lost on some theories, but won on an inverse condemnation (takings) theory. In related appeals, defendants appeal and Paterno cross-appeals. The takings count must be retried because of changes in the law and because Paterno proceeded on an erroneous legal theory. We uphold the jurys defense verdict on Paternos theory of dangerous condition of public property. The trial courts refusal to allow the jury to consider a nuisance theory was erroneous under existing precedent, but Paterno has not shown prejudice. We address a few other issues and reverse with directions.