California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from Flahive v. City of Dana Point, 72 Cal.App.4th 241, 85 Cal.Rptr.2d 51 (Cal. App. 1999):
Using "summary abatement" to refer to all abatements accomplished without a civil action, however, is problematic. Absent an emergency situation, minimum administrative due process protections are required before the physical abatement. (Leppo v. City of Petaluma, supra, 20 Cal.App.3d at p. 717, 97 Cal.Rptr. 840; see also Mohilef v. Janovici (1996) 51 Cal.App.4th 267, 276, 286-301, 58 Cal.Rptr.2d 721.) Those instances where a hearing is required should be distinguished from those where an emergency excuses one. We prefer to reserve the term "summary abatement" for the latter cases and adopt the term "administrative abatement" for those situations requiring some form of predestruction hearing.
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.