Legal Opinion
Griffith v. City of Santa Cruz
California Court of Appeal
Decided July 16, 2012No. H037088PublishedCited by 10 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
PREMO, J.
Petitioner Harold Griffith filed a petition for writ of mandate seeking to invalidate an ordinance enacted by respondent City of Santa Cruz (City). The ordinance calls for annual inspections of all residential rental properties within City limits. Petitioner argued, among other things, that the ordinance is preempted by the State Housing Law (Health & Saf. Code, § 17910 et seq.),1 violates constitutional principles of privacy and equal protection, and imposes a tax in violation of Proposition 218 (Cal. Const., art. XIII D) and Proposition 26 (Cal. Const., art. XHI C, § 1,…
2Cases cited17 opinions
- Camara v. Municipal Court of City and County of San FranciscoSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
- Federal Communications Commission v. Beach Communications, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1993
- Gregory v. AshcroftSupreme Court of the United States · 1991
- Associated Builders & Contractors, Inc. v. San Francisco Airports CommissionCalifornia Supreme Court · 1999
- California Federal Savings & Loan Ass'n v. City of Los AngelesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1991
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- Jauregui v. City of PalmdaleCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2014
- Southern California Edison Co. v. Public Utilities CommissionCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2014
- Newhall County Water District v. Castaic Lake Water AgencyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2016
- D-CO, Inc. v. City of La VistaNebraska Supreme Court · 2013
- Berg & Berg Enterprises v. City of San Jose CA6California Court of Appeal · 2015
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.