California Fish And Game Flooding May 21, 2006

Superior Court Judge Teresa Estrada-Mullaney in her February 2, 2009 Judgment Decision "Notice of Judgment" States:

"Judge Tangeman determined the flooding problem was "static" for several years prior to Plaintiff's purchase of his property. Plaintiff contends the flooding is continuous and can be abated. Plaintiff argues Defendants negligent maintenance of the drainage system increases the frequency and severity of the flooding. That is inconsistent with Judge Tangeman's determination that the primary culprit was POVE's improvements, rather than negligent maintenance of the drainage system. There was no showing that Union's operation of Well No. 8 contributed to the blockage. There was no showing of the County's responsibility for maintaining the drainage channel. There was no evidence that any accumulated debris in State's right of way contributed to the problems in the operation of the drainage system. County, State, Union or OCSD could not have abated the nuisance by undertaking any maintenance."

The California Second Appellate Court Justices--Steven Z. Perren Kenneth R. Yegan and Arthur Gilbert have Ruled the actions below are now Permanent and legal in California, per their Appellate Court Decision June 28, 2010! Each Justice is fully aware, that this flooding can be abated for only $43,295.00 Exhibit # 1790. They are aware of the OCSD daily use of this drainage system for well water discharge into the RR/POVE pond--mentiond on P. 2 and P. 6-Video P. 8 of their Appellate Court decision! They are aware of documents withheld by the County Of San Luis Obispo P. 6 and P. 7! (Prejudicial Error)

Category:

Comedy

Tags:

• Inverse
• Condemnation