Legal Opinion
County of Riverside v. City of Murrieta
California Court of Appeal
Decided July 15, 1998No. E020294PublishedCited by 14 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
GAUT, J.—
1. Introduction
On July 19, 1994, pursuant to the Community Redevelopment Law, section 33000 et seq. of the Health and Safety Code, 1 the Murrieta City Council adopted Ordinance No. 121 approving a redevelopment project involving 3,788.19 acres of land. Subsequently, 200 acres of vacant county land were eliminated from the project area, thus reducing the amount of property affected to 3,588.19 acres. The project is generally located in the area of the juncture of Interstates 15 and 215 in Riverside County.
The County of Riverside (County) filed a superior court action…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Kuhn v. Department of General ServicesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1994
- In Re Redevelopment Plan for Bunker Hill v. GoldmanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1964
- Honey Springs Homeowners Ass'n v. Board of SupervisorsCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1984
- Regus v. City of Baldwin ParkCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1977
- Card v. Community Redevelopment Agency of South PasadenaCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1976
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by14 opinions
- San Franciscans Upholding the Downtown Plan v. City & County of San FranciscoCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2002
- Seever v. Copley Press, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 2006
- Friends of Mammoth v. Town of Mammoth Lakes Redevelopment AgencyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2000
- Evans v. City of San JoseCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2005
- Community Youth Athletic Center v. City of National CityCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2013
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.