Redevelopment Agency v. Thrifty Oil Co.
California Court of Appeal
[Opinion certified for partial publication.*]
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
ASHBY, J.
Plaintiff and respondent the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Pomona (City) exercised its eminent domain powers to obtain a parcel of property owned by defendant and appellant Thrifty Oil Company (Thrifty). The Pomona, California property had been used as a gasoline station. The station was 23 years old, with some renovation in recent years. It was a self-service station with “no frills.” The soil on the land was contaminated due to gasoline spillage. Gasoline sales constantly declined during the years prior to the station being taken by City. Thrifty’s financial documents…
2Cases cited17 opinions
- People v. WatsonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1956
- Foreman & Clark Corp. v. FallonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1971
- City of Los Angeles v. DeckerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1977
- People Ex Rel. Department of Public Works v. McCulloughCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1950
- Community Redevelopment Agency v. AbramsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1975
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by18 opinions
- Moorhead Economic Development Authority v. AndaSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2010
- Housing Authority v. Suydam Investors, LLCSupreme Court of New Jersey · 2003
- Emeryville Redevelopment Agency v. Elementis Pigments, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 2002
- San Diego Metropolitan Transit Development Board v. Handlery Hotel, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 1999
- Northeast Ct. Economic Alliance, Inc. v. ATC PartnershipSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2001
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.