Legal Opinion
Hladek v. City of Merced
California Court of Appeal
Decided May 9, 1977No. Civ. 2882PublishedCited by 12 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
FRANSON, J.
Appellants, doing business as Yellow Cab, Merced Taxi Service and Merced Dial-A-Bus, filed a complaint against the respondent City of Merced purporting to state causes of action for inverse condemnation and unfair competition. Specifically, the complaint alleged that appellants owned a “dial-a-bus, dial-a-ride” service which operated in respondent city from 1970 until November 29, 1974; that commencing in June 1974 the respondent commenced a “dial-a-ride” transportation service in direct competition with appellant; that respondent operated its service at a loss; and that the…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- People v. RicciardiCalifornia Supreme Court · 1943
- Knoxville Water Co. v. KnoxvilleSupreme Court of the United States · 1906
- Harman v. City and County of San FranciscoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1972
- Clark v. City of Los AngeLesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1911
- Community Redevelopment Agency v. AbramsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1975
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by12 opinions
- Cel-Tech Communications, Inc. v. Los Angeles Cellular Telephone Co.California Supreme Court · 1999
- William Inglis & Sons Baking Co. v. Itt Continental Baking Company, Inc., William Inglis & Sons Baking Co. v. Itt Continental Baking Company, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1982
- San Diego Metropolitan Transit Development Board v. Handlery Hotel, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 1999
- Diva Limousine, Ltd. v. Uber Techs., Inc.District Court, N.D. California · 2019
- Jong Seau Chhour v. Community Redevelopment AgencyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1996
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.