Legal Opinion
Klensin v. City of Tucson
Court of Appeals of Arizona
Decided October 6, 1969No. 2 CA-CIV 642PublishedCited by 15 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
HATHAWAY, Judge.
The Klensins sought a declaratory judgment that the existing R-3 zoning classification of their property situated on East Broadway, Tucson, Arizona, was unconstitutional as not being within the police power, and as being arbitrary, capricious, unreasonable and discriminatory. They also asked for a restraining order to prevent the defendant, City of Tucson, from interfering with their making commerical use of the subject property as permitted under B-l zoning.
The cause was tried to the court sitting without a jury. Evidence was presented and the premises were viewed by the…
2Cases cited18 opinions
- Village of Euclid v. Ambler Realty Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1926
- Nectow v. City of CambridgeSupreme Court of the United States · 1928
- Zahn v. Board of Public WorksSupreme Court of the United States · 1927
- Arverne Bay Construction Co. v. ThatcherNew York Court of Appeals · 1938
- Bicknell Realty Co. v. Board of Appeal of BostonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1953
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by15 opinions
- Rogus v. LordsCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1991
- City of Phoenix v. OglesbyArizona Supreme Court · 1975
- Corrigan v. City of ScottsdaleCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1985
- State v. CookCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1984
- City of Phoenix v. BeallCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1974
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.