Kallgren v. Steele
| Decision Date | 21 February 1955 |
| Citation | 279 P.2d 1027,131 Cal.App.2d 43 |
| Court | California Court of Appeals Court of Appeals |
| Parties | C. T. KALLGREN, also known as Thorsten Kallgren, Gunnar A. Kallgren and Okey P. Kallgren, Plaintiffs and Respondents, v. Fred A. STEELE, Individually, and as Administrator of the Estate of Elizabeth E. Steele, Deceased, Defendant and Appellant. Civ. 20444. |
Sherman, Thompson & McCarthy and Walter W. Heil, Los Angeles, for appellant.
Taylor F. Peterson, San Bernardino, for respondents.
Plaintiffs purchased from defendant Fred A. Steele and his wife (who is now dead) a resort in the San Bernardino mountains, consisting of a store, gasoline and service equipment, and several cabins. These improvements were located on United States government land in the San Bernardino National Forest, and along the state highway. For many years the resort had been known as 'Bear Creek Lodge.'
The improvements had been built upon the government land, and maintained there under a special use permit from the federal forest service, with an annual rental of $150. The permit provided that it could be terminated at any time for any reason by the forest service.
The purchase price of the Lodge was $12,000, with $6,000 in cash, and the remainder in monthly installments of $100 or more.
At the time of the negotiations for the sale, the parties went to the office of the forest service and explained what they were doing. The forest service made no objection to the transfer of the permit to plaintiffs. Apparently the permit was continued in Mr. Steele's name until plaintiffs paid him the last installment on the purchase price.
Then the forest service notified plaintiffs that the permit would be revoked at the end of five years. The reasons given for this drastic action were that the store and cabins were too close to the state highway, that they were in very poor condition, and that they impaired scenic values.
This was the first time that plaintiffs learned that any part of Bear Creek Lodge was within or too close to the state right of way. Defendant, Mrs. Steele, knew about it all the time, but said nothing about it to plaintiffs. And due to the location of the buildings on the side of a precipitous mountain canyon it is impossible to move them farther away from the state highway.
Thus the forest service put an end to all of plaintiff's rights in and to Bear Creek Lodge, except salvage value of the buildings if the cost of removing them should possibly be less than what they can be sold for.
Nothing in the record indicates that the state highway department was making any complaint about the purpresture.
Plaintiffs brought this action for damages from defendants for fraud in concealing the fact that the improvements were in part within the highway right of way. Findings in the Superior Court were for plaintiffs, with damages fixed at $6,369.00.
Defendant, Mr. Steele, appeals from the judgment, and from certain orders hereinafter mentioned.
Reading the record, it appears quite likely that none of the parties gave much consideration to what the forest service might or might not do about the permit, or that the improvements would ever have to be moved on account of the state right of way. Bear Creek Lodge had been there for thirty years, and the parties just went ahead, without realizing that the tenancy was subject to the whim of some government officer clothed with a little brief authority.
This case presents an interesting example of the exercise of bureaucratic powers. If the improvements were too close to the highway, if their condition was poor, and if they impaired scenic values, it would...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Lingsch v. Savage
...(1951), 103 Cal.App.2d 80, 86, 229 P.2d 137; Curran v. Heslop (1953), 115 Cal.App.2d 476, 480-481, 252 P.2d 378; Kallgren v. Steele (1955), 131 Cal.App.2d 43, 46, 279 P.2d 1027; Burkett v. J. A. Thompson & Son (1957), 150 Cal.App.2d 523, 526, 310 P.2d 56; Buist v. C. Dudley De Velbiss Corp.......
-
Cohen v. Citizens Nat. Trust & Sav. Bank
...Code, sec. 1572. The same rule has been adopted where the action is brought at law for damages resulting from deceit. Kallgren v. Steele, 131 Cal.App.2d 43, 279 P.2d 1027; Barder v. McClung, 93 Cal.App.2d 692, 697, 209 P.2d 808; Rothstein v. Janss Investment Corp., 45 Cal.App.2d 64, 113 P.2......
-
Kammerer v. Western Gear Corp.
...Co., 406 F.2d 546 (9th Cir. 1969). Further, fraud may be, and often is, proven by circumstantial evidence. Kallgren v. Steele, 131 Cal.App.2d 43, 279 P.2d 1027 (1955); State v. Gallagher, 15 Wash.App. 267, 549 P.2d 499 Western Gear also contends the Kammerers' expert testimony misled the ju......
-
Williams v. Benson
...489 (subsurface water condition); Simmons v. Evans (1947), 185 Tenn. 282, 206 S.W.2d 295 (lack of water supply); Kallgren v. Steele (1955), 131 Cal.App.2d 43, 279 [3 Mich.App. 25] P.2d 1027 (building located in highway right-of-way); Forest Preserve Dist. of Cook County v. Christopher (1943......