US-California

Can the government take my property through eminent domain in California?

5th Amendment

U.S. Constitutional basis

Art. I, §19

CA Constitution provision

Minimum compensation

30 days

Notice before hearing

The Short Answer

Yes, the government can take your property through eminent domain in California for a public use, but only if it pays you just compensation and follows strict legal procedures.

What the Law Says

California law permits the government to acquire private property for public use through eminent domain, but only if certain constitutional and statutory requirements are met.

The California Constitution prohibits the taking of private property 'for public use' without 'just compensation.' This is found in Article I, Section 19. The U.S. Constitution’s Fifth Amendment also guarantees this right, and applies to California through the Fourteenth Amendment.

State law further defines how eminent domain must be carried out. The California Code of Civil Procedure (CCP) contains the full procedural framework, including notice requirements, valuation methods, and timelines. The government must prove the taking serves a legitimate public use — such as roads, schools, or utilities — and cannot take property solely for economic development that primarily benefits private parties, per recent interpretations.

Just compensation means the fair market value of the property at the time of the taking — not what the owner hopes to get, nor what the government hopes to pay. If only part of a property is taken, the owner may also recover damages for any reduction in value to the remaining land.

Statutory Text
Private property may be taken or damaged for public use only when just compensation, ascertained by a jury unless waived, has been paid to, or secured for, the owner.
— Cal. Const., art. I, §19 — Eminent Domain

Statutory Text
The power of eminent domain shall not be exercised unless the public use to which the property will be put is specifically stated in the resolution of necessity.
— Code of Civil Procedure § 1240.030 — Resolution of Necessity

What Courts Have Said

California courts have clarified limits on eminent domain, especially regarding what qualifies as 'public use' and how compensation is determined.

County of San Diego v. McClurken

California Court of Appeal · 1984

The court held that a county could not condemn land for a private golf course, even if some public access was promised, because the primary beneficiary was private — reinforcing that 'public use' requires genuine public benefit and control.

Kelo v. City of New London

U.S. Supreme Court · 2005

Though a federal case, it influenced California law: the Court upheld economic development takings, but California responded by tightening restrictions — leading to SB 670 (2006), which banned most economic development takings in the state.

What to Do

Review the government’s Resolution of Necessity and Notice of Intent — ensure it states a valid public use.

Obtain an independent appraisal to assess fair market value and potential severance damages.

Respond in writing within 30 days if you dispute the public use or compensation amount.

File an answer in Superior Court within 120 days of service of the complaint to challenge the taking or seek higher compensation.

Consider hiring an attorney experienced in California eminent domain — many cases settle before trial, but strong advocacy improves outcomes.

Sources

statuteCal. Const., art. I, §19 — Eminent Domain statuteCode of Civil Procedure § 1240.030 — Resolution of Necessity caseCounty of San Diego v. McClurken, 161 Cal. App. 3d 89 (1984)caseKelo v. City of New London, 545 U.S. 469 (2005)

Same Question, Other Jurisdictions

Not legal advice. This article is general information based on publicly available sources, written for educational purposes. Laws change and individual situations vary. Consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction before acting on anything you read here. Last reviewed: 2026-06-08.