Legal Opinion
G & D Holland Construction Co. v. City of Marysville
California Court of Appeal
Decided November 17, 1970No. Civ. 12699PublishedCited by 31 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
FRIEDMAN, J.
There are triable issues of fact in this mandate proceeding and the trial court erred in granting a summary judgment in favor of respondents, the City of Marysville and its officials.
Subject of the controversy is a land use proposal involving a square block of real estate in a section of the city known as East Marysville. Petitioners seek a writ of mandate to compel issuance of a building permit for an apartment house development on the property. The project, to consist of six buildings containing 76 apartment units, is to be financed under a provision of the National…
2Cases cited27 opinions
- Reitman v. MulkeySupreme Court of the United States · 1967
- Miller v. Board of Public Works of Los AngelesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1925
- Wilkins v. City of San BernardinoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1946
- Mulkey v. ReitmanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1966
- Wilke & Holzheiser, Inc. v. Department of Alcoholic Beverage ControlCalifornia Supreme Court · 1966
22 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by31 opinions
- Ogo Associates v. City of TorranceCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1974
- Building Industry Assn. of Southern California, Inc. v. City of CamarilloCalifornia Supreme Court · 1986
- Eldridge v. City of Palo AltoCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1976
- American Continental Insurance v. C & Z Timber Co.California Court of Appeal · 1987
- Raley v. California Tahoe Regional Planning AgencyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1977
26 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.