Legal Opinion
Klopping v. City of Whittier
California Supreme Court
Decided September 22, 1972No. Docket Nos. L.A. 29994, 29995PublishedCited by 193 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
MOSK, J.
Plaintiffs Klopping and Sarff (plaintiffs) instituted separate actions in inverse condemnation for damages alleged to have been caused by activities of the City of Whittier (city) prior to the eventual condemnation of the property then owned by plaintiffs. After the trial court sustained the city’s demurrers, judgments of dismissal were entered. Plaintiffs appeal.
On May 11, 1965, the city adopted a resolution to initiate proceedings designed to culminate in the formation of a parking district. Included among the properties to be condemned as part of those proceedings were…
2Cases cited36 opinions
- Rose v. State of CaliforniaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1942
- United States v. Virginia Electric & Power Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1961
- City of Buffalo v. J. W. Clement Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1971
- County of Los Angeles v. FausCalifornia Supreme Court · 1957
- Thomas E. Foster and Georgia Lee Foster, and Cross-Appellants v. City of Detroit, Michigan, and Cross-AppelleeCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1968
31 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by193 opinions
- Buzz Stew, LLC v. City of North Las VegasNevada Supreme Court · 2008
- Westgate, Ltd. v. StateTexas Supreme Court · 1992
- Selby Realty Co. v. City of San BuenaventuraCalifornia Supreme Court · 1973
- Agins v. City of TiburonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1979
- Deniz v. Municipality of GuaynaboCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 2002
188 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.