Legal Opinion
Guggenheim v. City of Goleta
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided September 28, 2009No. 06-56306PublishedCited by 14 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by Judge BYBEE; Dissent by Judge KLEINFELD
*999BYBEE, Circuit Judge:
Daniel Guggenheim and others bring a facial challenge to the City of Goleta’s mobile home rent control ordinance. Guggenheim argues that the ordinance, which effects a transfer of nearly 90 percent of the property value from mobile home park owners to mobile home tenants, constitutes a regulatory taking under Penn Central Transportation Co. v. New York City, 438 U.S. 104, 98 S.Ct. 2646, 57 L.Ed.2d 631 (1978). We have fielded such challenges before, but have never reached the merits of the takings claim. See, e.g., Equity…
2Cases cited69 opinions
- Lujan v. Defenders of WildlifeSupreme Court of the United States · 1992
- Warth v. SeldinSupreme Court of the United States · 1975
- Baker v. CarrSupreme Court of the United States · 1962
- United States v. SalernoSupreme Court of the United States · 1987
- Valley Forge Christian College v. Americans United for Separation of Church and State, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1982
64 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by14 opinions
- Rosedale Missionary Baptist Church v. New Orleans CityCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 2011
- Mann v. Calumet CityCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2009
- West Linn Corporate Park, L.L.C. v. City of West LinnOregon Supreme Court · 2010
- THUNDERBIRD HOTELS, LLC v. City of PortlandDistrict Court, D. Oregon · 2009
- Log Cabin Republicans v. United StatesDistrict Court, C.D. California · 2010
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.