(a) If the court determines that an applicant is entitled to withdraw any portion of a deposit that another party claims or to which another person may be entitled, the court may require the applicant, before withdrawing such portion, to file an undertaking. The undertaking shall secure payment to such party or person of any amount withdrawn that exceeds the amount to which the applicant is entitled as finally determined in the proceeding, together with interest as provided in Section 1255.280. If withdrawal is permitted notwithstanding the lack of personal service of the application for withdrawal upon any party to the proceeding, the court may also require that the undertaking indemnify the plaintiff against any liability it may incur under Section 1255.230. The undertaking shall be in such amount as is fixed by the court, but if executed by an admitted surety insurer the amount shall not exceed the portion claimed by the adverse claimant or appearing to belong to another person. If executed by two or more sufficient sureties, the amount shall not exceed double such portion.
§ 1255.240.Undertaking Required of Defendant Prior to Withdrawal
Title 7. Eminent Domain Law · Chapter 6. Deposit and Withdrawal of Probable Compensation; Possession Prior to Judgment · Article 2. Withdrawal of Deposit · Last amended 1982 · Last verified July 29, 2026
In one sentenceSection 1255.240 lets the court require a defendant to post an undertaking before withdrawing deposit money that another party claims or might be entitled to, sized to cover any excess above what the applicant ultimately recovers, plus interest.
Full Text of § 1255.240
(b) If the undertaking is required primarily because of an issue as to title between the applicant and another party or person, the applicant filing the undertaking is not entitled to recover the premium reasonably paid for the undertaking as a part of the recoverable costs in the eminent domain proceeding.
Plain-English Summary
When a withdrawal touches money someone else may be entitled to, the court can condition the withdrawal on an undertaking. That undertaking secures repayment to the competing party or person of any amount the applicant withdraws beyond what the applicant is finally determined to be entitled to, plus interest under § 1255.280. If the court permits withdrawal even though some party wasn't personally served with the withdrawal application, the undertaking can also protect the plaintiff against liability the plaintiff might incur under § 1255.230.
Sizing follows a familiar pattern for California undertakings: the court fixes the amount, but if an admitted surety insurer writes it, the amount can't exceed the disputed portion or the portion that appears to belong to someone else; if two or more individual sureties write it instead, the amount doubles.
Subdivision (b) adds one limit on cost recovery -- if the undertaking is required mainly because of a title dispute between the applicant and another party or person, the applicant can't later recover the premium paid for it as part of the recoverable costs in the eminent domain proceeding.
Frequently Asked Questions
When can the court require an undertaking before a withdrawal?
When the withdrawn portion is claimed by, or may belong to, another party or person.
What does the undertaking secure?
Repayment of any amount that ends up exceeding the applicant's final entitlement, with interest, and sometimes indemnification of the plaintiff against liability under § 1255.230.
Can the applicant recover the cost of the undertaking as litigation costs?
Not if the undertaking was required mainly because of a title dispute between the applicant and another claimant.
Amendment History
Amended by Stats. 1982, Ch. 517, Sec. 182.
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: undertaking withdrawal eminent domain deposit californiasurety bond condemnation withdrawal