Legal Opinion
Oceanic California, Inc. v. City of San Jose
District Court, N.D. California
Decided August 21, 1980No. C-78-2622 AJZPublishedCited by 8 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION AND ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR ABSTENTION AND GRANTING MOTION TO DISMISS
ZIRPOLI, District Judge.
Plaintiff, Oceanic California, Inc. (hereinafter “Oceanic”) alleges in its First Amended Complaint that defendant, the City of San Jose (“the City”), has deprived it of “the entire, economic beneficial use” of its property, some 7,300 acres of land lying within the City. Oceanic charges that the City has forced Oceanic to hold the land as a “public viewshed,” with no corresponding benefit accruing to Oceanic and without just compensation from the City. The complaint is premised exclusively on…
2Cases cited53 opinions
- Penn Central Transportation Co. v. New York CitySupreme Court of the United States · 1978
- Village of Euclid v. Ambler Realty Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1926
- Owen v. City of IndependenceSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
- Pennsylvania Coal Co. v. MahonSupreme Court of the United States · 1922
- Agins v. City of TiburonSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
48 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- Deltona Corp. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1981
- Terminals Equipment Co. v. City & County of San FranciscoCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1990
- Traweek v. City and County of San FranciscoDistrict Court, N.D. California · 1986
- Kinzli v. City of Santa CruzDistrict Court, N.D. California · 1985
- Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Riss International Corp.District Court, W.D. Missouri · 1981
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.