One of the most devastating floods resulting in serious legislative action in the state occurred in August 1929 when the State Engineer was given full authority to review all non-federal levees higher than 25 feet or impounded more than 50 acre-feet of water. In 1986, the Linda Levee collapse in Yuba County resulted in long-term legal ramifications for the state.
In the case of Paterno v. State of California, the California Supreme Court found that “when a public entity operates a flood management system built by someone else, it accepts liability as if it had planned and built the system itself.”
In 2009, the U.S. Army Corps. Of Engineers determined that vegetation on levees was not compatible with levee stability and therefore needed to be removed. The state of California initiated litigation with the Corps claiming the new rules violated federal law. This resulted in the Corps amending their rules to allow some vegetation, but the increased risk of levee failure is unclear with the amended rules.
The standards set forth by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers only apply to federally maintained levee systems. These standards do not apply to state-run, or Delta, levees like the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta Levees. These levees are not built to withstand constant pressure of water.
This raises the question about the efficacy of the Delta levees in the Sacramento-San Joaquin area. The state has allocated billions in funding as far back as 1980 for levee repair and maintenance.
If the state did not take the necessary precautions to prevent levee failure, or the engineers and architects contracted by the state did not do an adequate job to prepare the infrastructure, the state could be held liable for your damages.