Card v. Community Redevelopment Agency of South Pasadena
California Court of Appeal
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
COBEY, Acting P. J.
Defendant, the Community Redevelopment Agency of the City of South Pasadena (hereafter Agency), appeals from a judgment that, among other things, declares invalid the city’s ordinance purporting to amend an existing redevelopment plan for the Monterey Hills area in the city and awarding to plaintiffs’ attorneys legal fees in the amount of $20,400.
The essential basis for the judgment of invalidity is that the city actually adopted a new redevelopment plan under the pretext of amending an existing one. 1
The Agency principally contends that: (1) the action should have…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Bolling v. SharpeSupreme Court of the United States · 1954
- Truax v. CorriganSupreme Court of the United States · 1921
- Skelly v. State Personnel BoardCalifornia Supreme Court · 1975
- Brown v. MerloCalifornia Supreme Court · 1973
- In Re Redevelopment Plan for Bunker Hill v. GoldmanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1964
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by28 opinions
- Serrano v. PriestCalifornia Supreme Court · 1977
- Woodland Hills Residents Ass'n v. City Council of Los AngelesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1979
- Van Atta v. ScottCalifornia Supreme Court · 1980
- FOOTHILL-DE ANZA COMMUNITY COLLEGE DISTRICT v. EmerichCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2007
- Regus v. City of Baldwin ParkCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1977
23 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.