Legal Opinion
Blue Jeans Equities West v. City & County of San Francisco
California Court of Appeal
Decided January 31, 1992No. A051759PublishedCited by 14 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
WHITE, P. J.
In this action we consider whether the heightened scrutiny test alluded to in Nollan v. California Coastal Comm’n (1987) 483 U.S. 825 [97 L.Ed.2d 677,107 S.Ct. 3141] (hereafter Nollan) should be applied to San Francisco’s Transit Impact Development Fee (TIDF) Ordinance. (Ord. No. 224-81, codified at S. F. Admin. Code, § 38.1 et seq.) We conclude the Nollan analysis is applicable only to “possessory takings,” rather than “regulatory takings,” and does not apply to the TIDF.
Facts and Procedural Background
Plaintiff Blue Jeans Equities West is the owner and developer of Levi’s…
2Cases cited18 opinions
- Penn Central Transportation Co. v. New York CitySupreme Court of the United States · 1978
- Pennsylvania Coal Co. v. MahonSupreme Court of the United States · 1922
- Loretto v. Teleprompter Manhattan CATV Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1982
- Nollan v. California Coastal CommissionSupreme Court of the United States · 1987
- First English Evangelical Lutheran Church v. County of Los AngelesSupreme Court of the United States · 1987
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by14 opinions
- Ehrlich v. City of Culver CityCalifornia Supreme Court · 1996
- Saad v. City of BerkeleyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1994
- Tahoe Keys Property Owners' Ass'n v. State Water Resources Control BoardCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1994
- Loyola Marymount University v. Los Angeles Unified School DistrictCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1996
- Del Oro Hills v. City of OceansideCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1995
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.