SANTA ANA : City Loses Suit Over Home It Demolished

Settling a five-year feud, an Orange County Superior Court judge has ordered the city to pay $140,000 in damages to Mike Mitchell and Mary Acala for demolishing an 80-year-old historic home that the couple had planned to refurbish.

Although the city was the legal owner of the house at the time of the demolition in October, 1986, a Superior Court jury found that the city was guilty of breach of contract when it violated an earlier agreement to give the couple the structure. Acting on the guilty verdict, Superior Court Judge C. Robert Jameson on Monday set damages at $140,000. The couple had filed suit against both Santa Ana and the city’s Community Redevelopment Agency.

“I think it just reinforces my clients’ contention that the city hadn’t dealt fairly with them,” said Harry Seese, the couple’s attorney. “It was felt that they (the couple) were stepping on some toes and being punished for it.”

The squabble began in 1986 when the city agreed to give Mitchell and Acala the house located in a developing area on Main Street to make way for a new high-rise office building. The couple planned to move the house to another site and refurbish it.

In exchange, the couple were to sign a document that would relieve the city from any liability concerning the structure, obtain a loan to refurbish the house, and clear the property of all debris, city officials said.

However, the couple soon ran into difficulties in finding a site for the house. When the couple’s attempts to purchase one site fell through, they moved the home across Owens Street to a city-owned property so the office project could get under way. But when the home remained there for several months, the city threatened to raze it.

In October, the city decided Mitchell and Acala were not living up to their end of the bargain and demolished the home. The couple sued for breach of contract.

“There really was no need for the destruction of that house,” said Acala, who has married Mitchell and now goes by his surname. “The jurors said we did indeed comply and do everything we needed to do and that they were the ones that reneged.”

However, Assistant City Atty. Robert J. Wheeler called the damages “grossly excessive.” He said he would file an appeal requesting a new trial and asking for a reduction in damages.

“I feel the jury verdict is unwarranted and it’s unjust,” Wheeler said. “Here we are paying $140,000 because we destroyed something we owned.”