Associate Justice Carlos R. Moreno, Associate Justice Joyce L. Kennard, Associate Justice Kathryn Mickle Werdegar, Chief Justice Ronald M. George, Associate Justice Ming W. Chin, Associate Justice Marvin R. Baxter, and Associate Justice Carol A. Corrigan. The Second Appellate Court Justices--Steven Z. Perren, Arthur Gilbert and Kenneth R. Yegan do not view the 500 photos and videos presented to them and Judge Martin J. Tangeman of Caltrans raising State Highway 1 and then grading and shoveling debris and contamination into the Oceano storm water drainage system, while the Oceano Community Service District dredges 2500 gallons of debris and well water into this system daily as a cause of the flooding of our State Highway 1! What does the California Supreme Court think Per the undisputed facts as presented to Judge Martin J. Tangeman?
Justices--Steven Z. Perren, Arthur Gilbert and Kenneth R. Yegan State:
"Bookout points to no findings of fact in his favor. Instead, he relies on over 500 photographs and videos showing the flooding, several hundred documents which he claims show each defendant exercised dominion and control over the drainage facilities, and the testimony of his expert engineer, Keith Crow. He believes the evidence against the defendants was overwhelming.
Bookout claims the evidence is credible because it is uncontradicted. He cites Joseph v. Drew (1950) 36 Cal.2d 575, 579, for the proposition that uncontradicted testimony of a witness may not be disregarded, but should be accepted as proof of the fact to which the witness testified. Indeed, there are no doubt cases where the uncontradicted testimony of a witness is so credible that no reasonable trier of fact could reject it. But this is not such a case.
Here there is an obvious cause of the flooding. The Exchange modified the drainage by constructing a junction box and pipeline that redirected the flow of water by 90 degrees."
The Second Appellate Court Justices--Steven Z. Perren, Arthur Gilbert and Kenneth R. Yegan are fully aware of Judge Martin J. Tangemans statements in his August 5, 2008 inverse condemnation decision on P. 7 per photo exhibits # 1278-1337 and 1338 of this OCSD pipe directly inside the Railroad Culvert! They now allow Government to block and dam storm water drainages systems as seen in these photos! Photo Evidence/Exhibits presented to Judge Martin J. Tangeman 1278-1337-1338 pdf...
The Second Appellate Court is mistaken on P. 8 of their July 28, 2010 published California Case Law decision as testimony presented to the Second Appellate Court from Phil Davis of the Oceano Community Service District and exhibit 1768 are facts that have been seen and mentioned by the Second Appellate Court! This evidence is overwhelming as seen above and below! These drainage changesare made after the Appellate Courts P. 8 100% Blame of the Pismo Oceano Vegetable Exchange!
Associate Justice Carlos R. Moreno, Associate Justice Joyce L. Kennard, Associate Justice Kathryn Mickle Werdegar, Chief Justice Ronald M. George, Associate Justice Ming W. Chin, Associate Justice Marvin R. Baxter, and Associate Justice Carol A. Corrigan. OCSD stated to Judge Tangeman P. 383 Answer: "We run the well— Right now, we're running about five or six day a week. And we just start it in the morning, so it goes through a cycle" --Question. How much water is discharged out of the pipe each time that you do the procedure that you described? Answer. "Approximately 2,500 Gallons per minute?" Question. And the rate at which this water is discharged is somewhere around 1,300 gallons per minute? Answer. "Well, it starts out fast and gradually slow down until it stops. And when it stops, all the water is going into the system."P. 385 Question: Are you aware of any permission sought by the district, itself for operating this pipe? Answer: "Other then the Health Department, I don't know of any." P.386 by Mr. Belsher: Thirteen thirty-six and 1337, is this the same discharge pipe we discussed or saw in the previous photograph, only a different configuration? Answer. Yes. Question: And did you oversee an extension of the pipe into the culvert that's depicted there? Answer. Yes. Question. And this picture dated 2002, so does that seem as if that was the state of the -- to your recollection, That the pipe was projecting into the culvert as of 2002? Answer. Yes. Question. And 1338 is another example of the pipe extended into the culvert. Thirteen thirty nine, is this an OCSD employee? Answer. "I believe it is." Question: And I note that the pipe now is cut back from the entrance to culvert? Answer: "That's correct." Question: And is that an action which you and your staff took in 2002?Answer. "YES"
Loading...
3:10
Associate Justice Marvin R. Baxterby InverseCondemnation1163 views
The Oceano Community Service District flooding State Highway 1 from their well # 8 discharging debris into the Oceano Community's storm water drainage system!
Judge Martin J. Tangeman having seen and talked about this evidence in what is now California Case Law "Bookout v. State of California" does not think that this discharge into a California storm water drainage system is a cause of a State Highway flooding!
InverseCondemnation1 1 year ago