Lippman v. City of Oakland

Lippman owns Oakland rental property. The Building Services Department cited Lippman for blight and substandard living conditions. He sought administrative review. A hearing officer found that Lippman was in violation of ordinances for each citation; that testimony supported a finding that the property was blighted and abatement did not occur until after fees were assessed; and that testimony supported a finding that the substandard living conditions inside the property had not been abated. Lippman’s appeals were denied. Lippman claimed that his appeals should have been heard before the city council or an appeals board instead of a single hearing examiner. The trial court found that state law did not prohibit the use of a single hearing examiner and granted relief as to the blight citations. The city noticed a new administrative hearing. As to the substandard living conditions citation, the writ was denied. Lippman appealed, seeking to compel the city to hear administrative appeals before the city council or an appeals board pursuant to the Building Code. The court of appeal reversed, finding that the city’s current administrative appeal process for deciding appeals from Building Services citations conflicts with the Building Code and is contrary to the plain language of the State Housing Law. View "Lippman v. City of Oakland" on Justia Law