Barham v. Southern
California Edison Co. (1999) 74 C.A.4th 744 involved the failure of a lightning
arrestor on a pole belonging to Southern California Edison which ignited a brush
fire causing damage to the plaintiff's property. A jury awarded the plaintiff
$400,500 damages but denied recovery for inverse condemnation.
The Court of Appeal
affirmed the award for damages but reversed the denial of damages for inverse
condemnation. Since a public utility has the right of eminent domain, they can
also be held liable for inverse condemnation, taking the property without
payment.
3
The case of U.S. v. 3814
N.W. Thurman St. (1999) 164 Fed. 3d 1191 involved a fraudulent loan
application. Three-year income was shown as $308,106 when it was actually
$27,286 and $108,356 in outstanding liabilities were not disclosed. Based on
the false loan application, the U.S. Government filed an action in rem (against
the property) in a forfeiture action for knowingly making false statements to a
federally-insured financial institution. The District Court granted judgment in
favor of the government and the property forfeited. The trial court refused to
consider if the forfeiture was excessive under the Eighth Amendment.
The Ninth Circuit U.S.
Court of Appeals reversed, ruling that forfeiture was an excessive fine since
there was no loss to the bank and the owner had not been involved in other
criminal activity. If this were a criminal case, the penalty would have been
six months imprisonment and a fine of $500 to $5,000. The forfeiture of 40
times the maximum fine violates the excessive fines clause of the Eighth
Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.
Note: Compare this case
with U.S. v. 403 1/2 Skyline Drive, La Habra Heights, Ca. reported in the text.
The Skyline Drive case was not appealed.
4