Legal Opinion
Laidlaw Waste Systems, Inc. v. City of Phoenix
Court of Appeals of Arizona
Decided August 20, 1991No. 1 CA-CV 89-581PublishedCited by 9 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
EHRLICH, Judge.
The plaintiffs, Laidlaw Waste Systems, Heemstra and Slager, and Sunrise Disposal Services (“the companies”) appeal from the trial court’s dismissal of their amended complaint alleging that the City of Phoenix had taken their property without providing just compensation. We affirm the judgment.
FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY
Upon review of a trial court’s grant of a motion to dismiss, we accept the facts alleged by the non-moving party in the complaint as true. Donnelly Construction Co. v. Oberg/Hunt/Gilleland, 139 Ariz. 184, 186, 677 P.2d 1292, 1294 (1984). We will uphold…
2Cases cited27 opinions
- Penn Central Transportation Co. v. New York CitySupreme Court of the United States · 1978
- Agins v. City of TiburonSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
- Armstrong v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1960
- Goldblatt v. Town of HempsteadSupreme Court of the United States · 1962
- Webb's Fabulous Pharmacies, Inc. v. BeckwithSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
22 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- Crippen v. City of Cedar RapidsSupreme Court of Iowa · 2000
- Outdoor Systems, Inc. v. City of MesaCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1993
- Bagford v. Ephraim CityUtah Supreme Court · 1995
- Town of Gilbert v. Maricopa CountyCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2006
- Defeo v. SillDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1993
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.