Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1992-01-28; City Council; 11542; SettlementSETTLEMENT OF LAWSUIT ENTITLED MTQ. 1/28/92 CITY V. MURPHY, CASE NO. N48064 RECOMMENDED ACTION: CITY A CITV MQR.,% If the Council concurs, your action is to approve Resolution No. q&--yz which authorizes the City, through its counsel, to stipulate to judgment in the case City v. Murphy. ITEM EXPLANATION This is a condemnation action to secure the Alga Road sewer/storm drain easement which was a condition of approval to the Aviara development. This case was settled before the Honorable Ronald L. Johnson, judge of the superior court. At that time a settlement was entered and the parties stipulated to judgment, subject to City Council approval, to acquire the necessary parcel for the sum of $335,000. Both the City Engineer and the City Attorney recommend that the Council authorize the entry of a stipulated judgment in accordance with the stipulation for judgment attached to this agenda bill. FISCAL IMPACT There will be no fiscal impact as a result of this stipulated judgment since the developer is required to defray all costs associated with the acquisition of this property in connection with a condition of approval of the Aviara project. EXHIBIT Resolution No. 9 a-Y% Stipulated Judgment 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 RESOLUTION NO. 92-42 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA AUTHORIZING THE APPROVAL OF THE SETTLEMENT OF THE LAWSUIT ENTITLED CITY OF CARLSBAD V. MURPHY, CASE NO. N48064 WHEREAS, on recommendation of the City Attorney and special condemnation counsel the City Council of the City of Carlsbad, California has determined that a settlement in the case entitled City of Carlsbad v. Murphy is in the public interest; and WHEREAS, the City Council approves the settlement reached in court to acquire this parcel for $335,000 and approves the stipulated judgment to resolve this condemnation action. The developer will pay for the acquisition pursuant to a previous agreement in connection with the approval of the Aviara project. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Carlsbad, California, as follows: 1. That the above recitations is true and correct. 2. That the City Council approves the stipulated judgment and authorizes its attorney to so stipulate in the // // // // // // // // // // 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 0 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 lawsuit entitled City of Carlsbad v. Howard F. Murphy. et al, San Diego Superior Court Case No. N48064 in the form attached hereto. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a Regular Meeting of the City Council of the City of Carlsbad on the 28th day of January , 1992, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: Council Members Lewis, Kulchin, Larson, Stanton and Nygaard NOES: None ABSENT: None ATTEST: 2 \ I 2 3 4 8 8 7 0 0 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 le 10 20 21 22 23 24 28 29 27 28 3ON 8ALL, Acting Xy Attorney 1200 Etrn Avenue 2arlrbud, CA 92008 GAR0 & KEAQY, Special Counsel 3y: ROSCOE 0. KEAGY 3y: RICHARD R. FREELAND Eourth Floor, 3170 Fourth Avenue San Olego, CA 92103 (el Q) 297-31 70 httorneya for Plaintiff CITY OF CARLSBAD SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOR THE COUNty OF BAN DlEOd CITY OF CARLSBAD, a Municipal Corporation, 1 NO, N 48064 1 Plaintiff, 1 1 1 JUDGMENT V. 1 STIPULATXON FOR HOWARD F. MURPHY, et al. Dafendante. IT 18 HEREBY STIPULATED by Plaintiff CITY OF CARLSBAD, through itr attorneys of racord, RON BALL, Acting City Attocney and ASARO & KEAGY, Speaial Counsel, by RICHARD R, FREELAND, and Ddmdanto MXCHAEL X. MURPHY and HOWARD F. MURPHY, through thmir attorney, GOEBEL & SHENSA, by LOUIS E, dOEBEL, as followrr I. That the Judgmmnt attached herato a8 Exhibit "A" and incorporated herein by this reference, ohall be ontorod forthwith. // JUDQE: MUAPHY.8TP 01 1592 1 '. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 1s 18 17 18 18 20 21 22 23 24 2s 26 27 20 2. That Defendants MICHAEL K, MURPHY and HOWARD F. MURPHY hereby waive trial, the right to trial, hearing on the i88U.1, the making and filing of a Statement of Decision, Notice of Entry of Judgment, Notic8 of Recording Final Order of Condemnation, and thr right to move for a new trial or appeal. Datad : Dated: JUDOE: MURPHY.6TP 01 1- 2 RON BALL, Acting City Attorney MAR0 & KEAGY, Spacial Counrel By: Attorneys for Plaintiff * Richard R. Freeland GOEBEL & SHENSA By ; Attornaye for Dofendants '. .. 1 2 3 4 s 0 f 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 16 16 17 18 10 2Q 21 rz 23 24 2s 26 27 28 It appoatinq to the Court th&t Plaintiff CITY OF CARLSBAD, thtouqh its attornoyr of ceoord, RON BALL, Aatinq City Attotney, and ASARO a KEAGY, 6~0cia.l COUIIB@L, by RICHARD R. FREELAND, and .- Dafendantr MICHAlEL IC. MURPHY, owamr a8 to 404 intereat, and HOWARD SUPERIOR COURT Of THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA F. MUROHY and MICHAEL R. MURPHY, Co-Tzusteer of the Howard F, Murphy ron THE coum or AN DIBOO by LOUIS E. GOEBEL, have rtipulated thm Judgment ar horrinaftrr rat forth may be antored; it further: rppaaring th8t Dofendrntr RANCHO JUDQPMUWHY,JOQ 01 rm TWl ";"T 1 'A CITY OF CARLSBAD, a Municipal Corporrtlon, Plrlntllt, V. HOWARD F. MURPHY, et al. Ddendrnts. Trust for the Benofit of Howard F. Murphy dated Oetobor 6, 1989, ownorr as to 60% interest, through their attotney, GOEBEL & BHENSA, t 2 3 4 S 6 ? 0 0 10 11 12 13 14 I§ 16 It 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 2!3 20 27 28 IA COSTA, a Limited Partnarrhip, SAN DIEGO GAS & ELECTRIC CbMPANY, and PACIFIC TELEPHONE AND TELEGRAPH COMPANY have bean dirmirred; it further appearing that befondant ROE MURPHY, the rpoura of Mbhaal g, Muxphy, wm dofaultod for failure to appear at tho taquhrly noticod diaporition conforonce, rnd it Purthor appearing to bo L proper car0 thorofori IT IS ORDERED, ADJmMED AND DBCRESD: 1. That Plaintiff rooks to taka, acquit. and condomn tho rightr, title snd intetest in roal proporty as dorcrlbod in thr Rorolution of Nocossity ahown as Exhibit "AIt to Blrintfft'r Complaint, to which referance Is hereby made and by thir roformno, raid dercriptionr afe made a part hweof as if fully art forth; 2. That the condamnation and taking thereof io for tho pubZLc purporer ret forth in the Complaint heroin and nocemraty for ruch public urea 3. That tho payment to Defandants MICHAEL K, MURPHY, ownax a8 to 409 intmcmrt, and HOWARD F. MURPHY and MICXABL A. MURPHY, Co- Tmtrtoor of tha Howud F. Murphy Trust for thr Bonefit of Howard F. Murphy dated Oatobor 6, 1989, ownorr as to 605 interrrt in tho rum of $33S,000.00, toqathar with intarset at tho apportionment rrtr 81 provided in California Cod. of Civil. Procedure Soction 1268.3S0, on tha rum of $339,000.00, ftom July 23, 1990, tho dato on which Plaintiff took poasea8ion of tho property, to entry OC judgnrant, which total amount is $43,595.25, plur $79.08 qer day after Fobruary 1, 1992 until paid, for a total gum of $378,595.25; for tho takinq of the zeal property and intsmsts in teal proparty, mhalf conrtitute Cull and final payment for thr condomnation and taking of said roal property and intoroats in roal proporty, and JUDOE:MURM.JOQ 011- 2 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 4 0 10 11 12 13 14 18 is 17 10 10 20 21 22 23 24 25 28 27 26 I - -_ . oxtinguL8hoo all Defendants' claims which could havo beon made in thir ration, including, but not Limited to, intoroot, fmoa, aortm, litigation o~~enre~, pmcondemnation damages, 01: othor damagar; 4. That DOfenddnt8 RANCHO LA COSTA, a Limitod Partnarrhip, IAN DIEGO GAS & ELECTRIC COMPANY, and PACIFIC TELEPHONE AND TELEGRAPH COMRANY hrvo been dismissed and 8ro no longer partiam te tho action and that Defendant ROE MURPHY, the rpouro of Michrml R. Murphy, war defaulted for failure to appear at tho tsgularly noticod dirporition oonferonce. 5. Th8t said payment ai hereinabove rpoaifiod rhrll tarminata, canc.1, and oxtinguieh all 1ionm, learrholdr, and ancumbrancer of whatroaver nature on said rral property. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, ADJUDGED MtD DECREED: 6. That maid total rum of $33$.000,00, togrthor with Lntarrrt at the apportionmont rata as providod in California Code of Civil Procodure Section 1268.350, on the sum of l$335,000,00, from July 23, 1990, th8 data oa which Plaintiff took possesrion of tha ptoparty, to ontry of judgmant, which total amount ir $43,595.25, plur 879.08 POE dry after Fobrua~y 1, 1992 until paid, far a total sum of 8378,595.2); ba distributed to Dofendants MICHAEL A. MURPHY, owarr a8 to 40% intorest, and HOWARD F, MURPHY and MICHAEL K. MURPHY, Co- Trust008 of tho Howazd F. Murphy Trust for tha Bsnefit of HOW8rd F. Murphy dated October 6, 1989, owners as to 604 lntorort in aarm of thair attorney#, LOUIS E. GOEBEL of GOEBEL & SHENSA, as toUow8: /// /// JUWE:MURPHY.JW 01 1- 3 FROM nsnRo KEQGY 1-22.1992 13105 4 P. 1 I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 0 10 11 12 13 14 16 18 17 10 10 2a 21 22 23 24 28 24 27 28 I)* That tho Court orders tha County Troarurar to issue a wasrant mde payable to Defendants MICHAEL K. MURPHY, and HOWARD F. MURPHY, in the sum of $254,776.00; 21. That Plaintiff pay directly to Dsfrndantr MICHAEL E. MURPHY, and HOWARD F. MURPHY, the gum of $123,819.2S, plur intorart at tho rate of $79.08 from Fobruary 1, 1992 until paid; 7, That the County Tterrurrr is heroin authotizod to irruo a warrant to Plaintiff CITY OF CARLSBXD for tho balaaoo of thr principal rum previously depositod with the Court, if any, plur all accruad intorert to the date of the Withbrawal8; 8. That Plaintiff aooks to tako, aoquiro, condomn and own the intoroatr in raid real ptoporty rrfrrred to and dorcribod horoini 9. That Borsearion having bean rakon by Plaintiff oh July 23, 1990 , all tax.8, prnaltirr, colt$, lirn8, learoho~dr, and onoumbrancaa of whatsoever nature which ate a lion on raid parcel and whioh are apportioned to that portion of tho fircal year aftar arid dato are hareby cancoled pursuant to roctfonr 3001 at arq. of tho Ravanue and Taxation Code. 10. That trial, tha right to trial, hoating on tho irruor, tho making and filing of a Ststomont of Deaision, the right to mow for a now trial or appeal, Findings of Faat, Conclurionr of Law, Notice of Entry of Judgmsnt and Notice of Rooording Final Ordmr of Condomnation arm waived, and that upon paymant of $333,000.00, JUOOE:MURPHY.JW 011402 4 I. L .. ,. 1 2 3 4 3 8 f 8 a 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 10 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 20 27 20 togethrr with interest at the apportionment rata a8 providod in California Cod. of Civil Procedure Section 1268.390, on tha rum 02 8335,000,00, fton July 23, 1990, the date on which Plaintiff took parrarrion Of tha propetty, t8 antty of judgment, which total amount i# $43,995.25, plus $79.08 psr day after February 1, 1992 until paid, for a total run of $378,995.25, a8 herain speoifiod, that PLainttCC 8haLl bo antitlad to a Final Order of Conarmnation, Dated 1 Judga of tha Sugoriot Court JUOQEMUWJ06 01 1-