Yossi Govrin, et al. v. City of Santa Monica, California, et al.

No State shall deprive a person of life, liberty or property without due process of law. U.S. Const., amend. XIV, § 1; Washington v. Glucksberg, 521 U.S. 702, 719 (1997). Substantive due process protects an individual against arbitrary takings by the government. Wolff v. McDonnell, 418 U.S. 539, 558, (1974). The government must not abuse its power or use it to oppress. Yet, this is precisely what happened when the City of Santa Monica (the “City”) unlawfully took, without any compensation, a well-renowned artist’s life’s work, and who had invested $1.7 million of his own money to transform a dilapidated airport hangar into a thriving and lucrative art center. Such a disgraceful exercise of government power “shocks the conscience.” Rochin v. California, 342 U.S. 165, 169, 172-73 (1952). THE QUESTION PRESENTED IS: Whether a party with close ties to the government should be allowed to proceed with litigating its claims based on equitable tolling and/or estoppel grounds where the governmental entity has actual notice of a party’s claims and was given a full opportunity to investigate and settle the claims?