When property is sought to be acquired pursuant to Section 1240.410, the resolution of necessity and the complaint filed pursuant to such resolution shall specifically refer to that section. It shall be presumed from the adoption of the resolution that the taking of the property is authorized under Section 1240.410. This presumption is a presumption affecting the burden of producing evidence.
§ 1240.420.Resolution and Complaint
Title 7. Eminent Domain Law · Chapter 3. The Right to Take · Article 5. Excess Condemnation · Enacted 1975 · no amendments on record · Last verified July 29, 2026
In one sentenceSection 1240.420 requires the resolution of necessity and complaint in a remnant-condemnation case to specifically reference § 1240.410, and gives the resolution's adoption a rebuttable presumption, affecting only the burden of producing evidence, that the taking is authorized.
Full Text of § 1240.420
Plain-English Summary
Two procedural requirements apply once a public entity condemns a remnant under § 1240.410. The resolution of necessity and the complaint filed under it must specifically refer to that section, so a defendant knows exactly what legal basis the entity is relying on.
Adopting the resolution then triggers a presumption: the taking is presumed authorized under § 1240.410. That presumption affects only the burden of producing evidence, the lighter of California's two presumption categories, meaning the owner can rebut it by coming forward with some evidence that the property isn't really a remnant or that a reasonable alternative existed, without having to persuade the court by a preponderance on the point.
Frequently Asked Questions
What must the resolution and complaint say for a remnant-condemnation taking?
They must specifically refer to § 1240.410, the section authorizing remnant condemnation.
What effect does adopting the resolution have on proving the taking is authorized?
Section 1240.420 creates a presumption that the taking is authorized under § 1240.410, but it's a presumption affecting only the burden of producing evidence.
Can a property owner rebut that presumption?
Yes, by producing evidence that the property isn't really a remnant or that the public entity had a reasonable way to avoid creating one.
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: remnant resolution of necessity californiapresumption remnant condemnation california