Legal Opinion
Lockaway Storage v. County of Alameda
California Court of Appeal
Decided May 9, 2013No. A130874, A132768PublishedCited by 23 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
SIGGINS, J.
I. INTRODUCTION
The County of Alameda (County) determined that an amendment to its general plan adopted by voters as Measure D prohibited Lockaway Storage and other parties from completing a project to develop a self-storage facility in the County. Lockaway sued for inverse condemnation and civil rights violations. After issuing a writ of mandate that authorized the project to proceed, the superior court conducted a nonjury trial which resulted in a judgment holding the County liable for a temporary regulatory taking and awarding Lockaway damages of $989,640.96. Pursuant to a…
2Cases cited28 opinions
- Penn Central Transportation Co. v. New York CitySupreme Court of the United States · 1978
- Pennsylvania Coal Co. v. MahonSupreme Court of the United States · 1922
- Ruckelshaus v. Monsanto Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1984
- First English Evangelical Lutheran Church v. County of Los AngelesSupreme Court of the United States · 1987
- Agins v. City of TiburonSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
23 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by23 opinions
- Mack Phillips v. Montgomery County, TennesseeTennessee Supreme Court · 2014
- Bottini v. City of San Diego, California Court of Appeal, 5th District2018
- La Mirada Avenue Neighborhood Ass'n of Hollywood v. City of Los AngelesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2016
- Cypress Semiconductor Corp. v. Maxim Integrated Products, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 2015
- Pacific Shores Property Owners Ass'n v. Department of Fish & WildlifeCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2016
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.