Legal Opinion
Eleopoulos v. Richmond Redevelopment Agency
District Court, N.D. California
Decided November 20, 1972No. 72-1012PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
ORDER DENYING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS
WOLLENBERG, District Judge.
Plaintiffs have filed an action alleging a de facto taking of their property by defendants without just compensation in violation of the 5th and 14th Amendments. Jurisdiction is alleged under 28 U.S.C. § 1331. The major actions which allegedly constitute a taking are as follows: On September 8, 1959, the City Council of Richmond, California adopted Resolution No. 7092. That resolution designated Redevelopment Area No. 10, which includes plaintiffs’ two-story commercial building, declared that the area was blighted, and…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Klopping v. City of WhittierCalifornia Supreme Court · 1972
- Thomas E. Foster and Georgia Lee Foster, and Cross-Appellants v. City of Detroit, Michigan, and Cross-AppelleeCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1968
- Foster v. City of Detroit, MichiganDistrict Court, E.D. Michigan · 1966
- Thomas E. Foster v. Mark Herley, Director of the Detroit Housing Commission, Detroit Housing Commission, City of Detroit, MichiganCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1964
- Sayre v. United StatesDistrict Court, N.D. Ohio · 1967
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Dahl v. City of Palo AltoDistrict Court, N.D. California · 1974
- Muskegon Theatres, Inc., a Michigan Corporation v. City of Muskegon, a Municipal Corporation, and the Amazon Company, a Michigan CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1974
- City of Chicago v. LoitzIllinois Supreme Court · 1975
- Donohoe Construction Co. v. Maryland-National Capital Park & Planning CommissionDistrict Court, D. Maryland · 1975
- DONOHOE C. CO., INC. v. Maryland-National CP & P. Com'nDistrict Court, D. Maryland · 1975