(a) None of the provisions of this article is intended to limit, or shall limit, any other provision of this article, each of which is a distinct and separate authorization.
§ 1240.160.Provisions Distinct and Separate Authorization
Title 7. Eminent Domain Law · Chapter 3. The Right to Take · Article 2. Rights Included in Grant of Eminent Domain Authority · Enacted 1975 · no amendments on record · Last verified July 29, 2026
In one sentenceSection 1240.160 declares that none of Article 2's provisions limits any other provision within the article, and that Articles 2 through 7 of this chapter, covering rights included in a grant, future use, substitute condemnation, excess condemnation, compatible use, and more necessary public use, are each distinct and separate sources of authority.
Full Text of § 1240.160
(b) None of the provisions of Article 2 (commencing with Section 1240.110), Article 3 (commencing with Section 1240.210), Article 4 (commencing with Section 1240.310), Article 5 (commencing with Section 1240.410), Article 6 (commencing with Section 1240.510), or Article 7 (commencing with Section 1240.610) is intended to limit, or shall limit, the provisions of any other of the articles, each of which articles is a distinct and separate authorization.
Plain-English Summary
This section is a housekeeping rule with real consequences. Subdivision (a) says the provisions within Article 2 don't limit one another; a condemnor invoking one provision of this article isn't thereby boxed out of relying on another.
Subdivision (b) extends the same principle across the whole chapter. Article 2 (rights included in a grant of eminent domain authority), Article 3 (future use), Article 4 (substitute condemnation), Article 5 (excess condemnation), Article 6 (compatible use), and Article 7 (more necessary public use) each stand as a distinct and separate authorization. None limits any of the others.
In practice, this means a condemnor facing a complicated acquisition, say, one involving both a future-use timeline and a substitute-condemnation exchange, doesn't have to pick a single article and live within its own four corners. The different categories in this chapter can operate side by side, each supplying its own independent basis for the taking.
Frequently Asked Questions
Can a condemnor rely on more than one article of this chapter at the same time?
Yes. Section 1240.160 makes clear that Articles 2 through 7 are each distinct and separate authorizations that don't limit one another.
Does relying on one provision within Article 2 prevent using another provision in the same article?
No, subdivision (a) applies the same non-limiting principle within Article 2 itself.
Which articles does subdivision (b) list as separate authorizations?
Article 2 (rights included in a grant), Article 3 (future use), Article 4 (substitute condemnation), Article 5 (excess condemnation), Article 6 (compatible use), and Article 7 (more necessary public use).
Amendment History
Added by Stats. 1975, Ch. 1275.
Source & verification. Section text is reproduced verbatim from
the Deering's California Codes Annotated / vLex. Enacted by the California Legislature.
Last verified July 29, 2026.
· Official source
Also known as: eminent domain articles not mutually exclusive california