Legal Opinion

Pacific Palisades Bowl Mobile Estates, LLC v. City of Los Angeles

California Supreme Court

Decided November 29, 2012No. S187243PublishedCited by 106 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

WERDEGAR, J.

We hold here that the requirements of the California Coastal Act of 1976 (Pub. Resources Code, § 30000 et seq.; hereafter Coastal Act) and the Mello Act (Gov. Code, §§ 65590, 65590.1) apply to a proposed conversion, within California’s coastal zone, of a mobilehome park from tenant occupancy to resident ownership. In so holding, we reject the argument that such a conversion is not a “development” for purposes of the Coastal Act, and further reject the argument that Government Code section 66427.5, a provision of the Subdivision Map Act (Gov. Code, §§ 66410-66499.37),…

2Cases cited23 opinions

  1. Merrill v. Navegar, Inc.California Supreme Court · 2001
  2. Mejia v. ReedCalifornia Supreme Court · 2003
  3. Horn v. County of VenturaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1979
  4. Yost v. ThomasCalifornia Supreme Court · 1984
  5. People v. AriasCalifornia Supreme Court · 2008

18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by106 opinions

  1. People v. ValenciaCalifornia Supreme Court · 2017
  2. Even Zohar Construction & Remodeling, Inc. v. Bellaire Townhouses, LLCCalifornia Supreme Court · 2015
  3. State Department of Public Health v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 2015
  4. Riverside County Sheriff's Department v. StiglitzCalifornia Supreme Court · 2014
  5. Connor v. First Student, Inc.California Supreme Court · 2018

101 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API