Legal Opinion

Thomsen v. City of Escondido

California Court of Appeal

Decided September 26, 1996No. D025853PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

*887Opinion

HUFFMAN, J.

This case involves the interpretation of an initiative measure establishing mobilehome park space rent review in Escondido (Proposition K; codified in section 29-101 et seq. of the City of Escondido’s Municipal Code) (the ordinance). Escondido officials (the City) interpreted the ordinance as regulating the amount of rent this mobilehome park owner, plaintiff and respondent Bart Thomsen, could charge prospective purchasers of existing coaches in his park. Thomsen disagreed, asserting the ordinance did not limit his right to negotiate mutually agreeable rents with prospective…

2Cases cited18 opinions

  1. Blank v. KirwanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1985
  2. Yee v. City of EscondidoSupreme Court of the United States · 1992
  3. Dyna-Med, Inc. v. Fair Employment & Housing CommissionCalifornia Supreme Court · 1987
  4. People v. Lance W.California Supreme Court · 1985
  5. Abbott v. City of Los AngelesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1960

13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Sahlolbei v. Providence Healthcare, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 2003
  2. City & Cnty. of S.F. v. Post, California Court of Appeal, 5th District2018
  3. San Diego Unified Port District v. GallagherCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1998
  4. City and County of San Francisco v. PostCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2018
  5. French Laundry Partners, LP dba The French Laundry v. Hartford Fire Insurance CompanyDistrict Court, N.D. California · 2020

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API