Legal Opinion
Armando Valles v. County of Pima
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided December 19, 2012No. 11-15794UnpublishedCited by 2 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM **
Valles et al. (“Lot Owners”) appeal from the district court’s grant of summary judgment for the County of Pima (“the County”) on their claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and state law. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.
The Lot Owners raised four claims: promissory estoppel, substantive due process, Fifth Amendment taking, and negligence. The district court correctly granted summary judgment to the County on each of these claims. The Lot Owners cannot establish promissory estoppel because the. County made no promise to them which they could have…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Penn Central Transportation Co. v. New York CitySupreme Court of the United States · 1978
- Shanks v. DresselCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2008
- Walls v. Arizona Department of Public SafetyCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1991
- Chewning v. PalmerArizona Supreme Court · 1982
3Cited by2 opinions
- Daurio v. Arizona, State ofDistrict Court, D. Arizona · 2025
- Valles v. Pima Cnty.Supreme Court of the United States · 2013