Sterling Park, L.P. v. City of Palo Alto
California Supreme Court
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
CHIN, J.
A developer wanted to build 96 condominiums on a parcel of land. As a condition of obtaining a permit to do so, the city required the developer to set aside 10 condominium units as below market rate housing and make a substantial cash payment to a city fund. The developer proceeded with the construction but challenged in court these requirements pursuant to a statute that permits a developer to proceed with a project while also “protest-ting] the imposition of any fees, dedications, reservations, or other exactions imposed on a development project.” (Gov. Code, § 66020, subd.…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Ehrlich v. City of Culver CityCalifornia Supreme Court · 1996
- Shapell Industries, Inc. v. Governing BoardCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1991
- County of San Diego v. MillerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1975
- Barratt American, Inc. v. City of Rancho CucamongaCalifornia Supreme Court · 2005
- Clark v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 2010
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by17 opinions
- California Building Industry Ass'n v. City of San JoseCalifornia Supreme Court · 2015
- Lynch v. Cal. Coastal CommissionCalifornia Supreme Court · 2017
- People v. Overstock.com, Inc., California Court of Appeal, 5th District2017
- 616 Croft Ave., LLC v. City of West HollywoodCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2016
- California Building Industry Ass'n v. City of San JoseCalifornia Supreme Court · 2015
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.