Legal Opinion
Kaiser Development Co. v. City & County of Honolulu
District Court, D. Hawaii
Decided September 25, 1986No. Civ. 84-0389PublishedCited by 27 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
DECISION ON MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
SAMUEL P. KING, Senior District Judge.
Plaintiffs Kaiser Development Co. (Kaiser) 1 and plaintiffs/intervenors Bishop Es tate (Bishop) 2 sued defendant City and County of Honolulu (City) for various actions taken by the City affecting a parcel of property known as Queen’s Beach, which Kaiser and Bishop had sought to develop. Plaintiffs argued, inter alia, that the City’s regulations and other actions rise to the level of a “taking” of their property and that the City has engaged in inequitable precondemnation activities for which they are entitled to…
2Cases cited77 opinions
- Adickes v. S. H. Kress & Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1970
- Village of Arlington Heights v. Metropolitan Housing Development Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1977
- Penn Central Transportation Co. v. New York CitySupreme Court of the United States · 1978
- Williamson v. Lee Optical of Oklahoma, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1955
- Village of Euclid v. Ambler Realty Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1926
72 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by27 opinions
- Robinson v. City of SeattleWashington Supreme Court · 1992
- Herrington v. County of SonomaCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1987
- Herrington v. County of SonomaCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1988
- Toigo v. Town of RossCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1998
- Electri-Tech, Inc. v. H F Campbell Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1989
22 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.