Legal Opinion
Hagenburger v. City of Los Angeles
California Court of Appeal
Decided April 7, 1942No. Civ. 12001PublishedCited by 20 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtNourse, P. J.
The plaintiffs instituted this action to restrain the enforcement of a municipal zoning ordinance insofar as it related to the property occupied by them in block 49 of a subdivision in the western section of the city of Los Angeles.
About 1921 they acquired a lot on Santa Monica Boulevard and subsequently acquired three adjoining lots, all in block 50, upon which they established a nursery. This property extended north to Ohio Avenue and was all zoned as business property. In 1931 they leased four lots in block 49 which faced on the south side of Ohio Avenue opposite the nursery, and they…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Reynolds v. BarrettCalifornia Supreme Court · 1938
- Chudnov v. Board of AppealsSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1931
- Hill v. Georgia Casualty Co.Texas Commission of Appeals · 1932
- Ginn v. Forest Nursery Co.Tennessee Supreme Court · 1932
- Hein v. LudwigSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1935
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by20 opinions
- Wilkins v. City of San BernardinoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1946
- Kissinger v. City of Los AngelesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1958
- Otis v. City of Los AngelesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1942
- Farmegg Products, Inc. v. Humboldt CountySupreme Court of Iowa · 1971
- Arastra Limited Partnership v. City of Palo AltoDistrict Court, N.D. California · 1975
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.