Legal Opinion

Capistrano Beach Water District v. Taj Development Corporation

California Court of Appeal

Decided May 25, 1999No. G021735PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

SILLS, P. J.

We decide here whether a sewer connection fee of capacity charge, paid by a developer to connect its hotel to a sanitation district’s sewer system, falls within the definition of a “development fee” under Government Code section 66000 1 et seq. (the Mitigation Fee Act, hereafter the Act). The Act restricts the imposition and use of development fees and provides developers a limited right of refund. (§ 66001, subd. (e).) The right to a refund was not allowed for sewer connection fees and capacity charges under the Act in place at the time of the underlying action. (Former §…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Great Lakes Properties, Inc. v. City of El SegundoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1977
  2. Oldham v. KizerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1991
  3. Usher v. County of MontereyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1998

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Richmond v. Shasta Community Services DistrictCalifornia Supreme Court · 2004
  2. Barratt American, Inc. v. City of Rancho CucamongaCalifornia Supreme Court · 2005
  3. California Building Industry Ass'n v. San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control DistrictCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2009
  4. Barratt American, Inc. v. City of Rancho CucamongaCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2003
  5. Coziahr v. Otay Wat. Dist.California Court of Appeal · 2024

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API