SITE HISTORY_CASE 2 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Lisa F. Brown, Esq. July 29, 1988 Page :,2 storage tank law or other environmental laws. E.g. , In re Quanta Resources Corp. , 739 F.2d 912 (3d Cir. 1984) . The Bank also is responsible for removal of the tanks. The Bank accepted an assignment of EP's leasehold, including fixtures, as collateral for a loan issued to EP in 1975 . (we have evidence of the assignment of all fixtures, which would include the tanks, in a landlordis waiver between the Port and the Bank, attached as Exhibit "A!') . Civil Code section 822 states that an: assignee of a leasehold by way of security for a loan assumes the obligations of its assignor, if the assignment is accompanied by possession of the premises. By its actions, the Bank undeniably took possession of the premises and "stepped into the shoes" of EP. The Bank may have had some right to protect its security . from forfeiture or depreciation without assuming the tenant's :'obligations. However, the Bank's ' rent_al payments on the EP property and seizure of EP's assets through the bankruptcy court were clearly unrelated to the protection:, of the Bank's security interest. The Port could not have foreclosed on EP because of the automatic stay imposed by the Bankruptcy� Code. 11 U.S.C. § 362 (a) (3) . Therefore, the Bank's pretensions that it was protecting a security interest are merely a smoke screen to disguise the Bank's real . actions: taking possession of the EP property then attempting to abandon it when it became clear that some liability might attach because of the tanks. In contrast to EP and the Bank's liability, the Port's responsibility for the EP tanks is attenuated. Mr. Hoslett's analysis provided with your July 8, 1988 letter to Gary Allen is hardly persuasive: His interpretation of Civil Code section 1019 is wrong. " Civil Code section 1013 states the general rule in California" law that, in the absence of an agreement to the contrary, a landowner may, at its choosing, have another person's fixtures on the owner's property removed or choose to assume ownership of such fixtures. Civil Code section 1.019" allows a tenant to maintain trade -fixtures (such as the underground storage tanks) on a leasehold during the term of a lease. This section is for the protection of tenants who otherwise would be at the mercy of landlords for the removal of their valuable trade fixtures in the absence of a specific agreement to the contrary. See Trabue Pittman Corp. v. County of L.A. , 29 C. 2d 385, 393-94 (1946) (explaining the origin of section 1019 in the context of real property taxation) . Section 1019 does not otherwise affect the rights or duties of a landlord. ; He stall has the right under section 1013 to. assume ownership of valuable fixtures placed on his property. However,