Legal Opinion
Gary A. Moore v. City of Costa Mesa
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided September 26, 1989No. 87-6432PublishedCited by 38 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
LEAYY, Circuit Judge:
OVERVIEW
The appellant Gary Moore (Moore) claims that a conditional variance requiring part of his property to be deeded to the City of Costa Mesa (the City) was a partial temporary taking in violation of the fifth amendment, for which he is owed compensation. The conditional variance ultimately was declared invalid by the California courts.
We affirm the decision of the district court that the conditional variance was not a violation of the takings clause for which compensation is owed.
FACTS
Moore owns two adjacent lots, each containing a house, on Wilson Street in Costa…
2Cases cited17 opinions
- Conley v. GibsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1957
- Pennsylvania Coal Co. v. MahonSupreme Court of the United States · 1922
- Hodel v. Virginia Surface Mining & Reclamation Assn., Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1981
- 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
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by38 opinions
- Mayhew v. Town of SunnyvaleTexas Supreme Court · 1998
- Neilson v. Union Bank of California, N.A.District Court, C.D. California · 2003
- McDougal v. County of ImperialCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1991
- Lee Argabright Norma J. Argabright v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1994
- Herman Corn, Trustee v. City of Lauderdale Lakes, a Florida Municipal CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 1990
33 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.