Littoral Development Co. v. San Francisco Bay Conservation & Development Commission
California Court of Appeal
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
PETERSON, P. J.
This is the third appeal in which we have dealt with legal issues arising from the anomalous status of a bayfront parcel owned by appellants Littoral Development Co. and Diversified Realty Services (hereafter jointly referred to as Littoral). Here, Littoral contends: (1) The bayward one-third of its parcel was not subject to the jurisdiction of the San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission (BCDC), under the definition of Government Code 1 section 66610, as “marshland” lying lower than five feet in elevation; (2) BCDC’s enforcement actions constituted a…
2Cases cited19 opinions
- Lucas v. South Carolina Coastal CouncilSupreme Court of the United States · 1992
- United States v. Riverside Bayview Homes, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1985
- Hensler v. City of GlendaleCalifornia Supreme Court · 1994
- Tabb Lakes, Ltd. v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1993
- Arcadia Unified School District v. State Department of EducationCalifornia Supreme Court · 1992
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Landgate, Inc. v. California Coastal CommissionCalifornia Supreme Court · 1998
- Allegretti & Co. v. County of ImperialCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2006
- Loewenstein v. City of LafayetteCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2002
- Landgate, Inc. v. California Coastal CommissionCalifornia Supreme Court · 1998
- Landgate, Inc. v. California Coastal CommissionCalifornia Supreme Court · 1998