Legal Opinion
Acker v. Baldwin
California Supreme Court
Decided July 30, 1941No. L. A. 16619PublishedCited by 53 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtEdmonds, J.
In an action for declaratory relief brought by the respondent, the trial court determined that a zoning ordinance enacted by the county of Los Angeles was unconstitutional. As a part of the decree, the court enjoined the appellants, all of whom are officers of the county, from enforcing it.
The ordinance (No. 1813 N. S.), adopted in 1930, zoned an unincorporated area, which included the town of Temple City, for specified uses. The respondent is the owner of a house and lot situated within the territory described in the ordinance as Zone R-l. Within this zone, the ordinance provides, “No…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Miller v. Board of Public Works of Los AngelesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1925
- Zahn v. Board of Public Works of Los AngelesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1925
- Jones v. City of Los AngelesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1930
- Laurel Hill Cemetery v. City & County of San FranciscoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1907
- Rehfeld v. City & County of San FranciscoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1933
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by53 opinions
- Lockard v. City of Los AngelesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1949
- Wilkins v. City of San BernardinoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1946
- Consolidated Rock Products Co. v. City of Los AngelesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1962
- County of San Diego v. McClurkenCalifornia Supreme Court · 1951
- Wheeler v. GreggCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1949
48 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.