Legal Opinion
City of Tucson v. Corbin
Court of Appeals of Arizona
Decided December 17, 1980No. 2 CA-CIV 3626PublishedCited by 12 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
HATHAWAY, Chief Judge.
In this appeal, we are faced with the question of the constitutionality of Arizona’s property tax increment financing scheme under the slum clearance and redevelopment law, A.R.S. Secs. 36-1471, et seq.
Our legislature has defined a method of redevelopment of slum or blighted areas within municipalities. After a finding of necessity has been made by the local governing body, a slum clearance and redevelopment commission may be formed to pre pare a redevelopment plan. 1 A municipality is given broad powers of eminent domain and disposal of property in a…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- State Ex Rel. Washington State Finance Committee v. MartinWashington Supreme Court · 1963
- New Times, Inc. v. Arizona Board of RegentsArizona Supreme Court · 1974
- Richards v. City of MuscatineSupreme Court of Iowa · 1975
- Tribe v. Salt Lake City CorporationUtah Supreme Court · 1975
- City of Phoenix v. Phoenix Civic Auditorium & Convention Center Ass'nArizona Supreme Court · 1965
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by12 opinions
- Oklahoma City Urban Renewal Authority v. Medical Technology & Research AuthoritySupreme Court of Oklahoma · 2000
- Sadlowski v. Town of ManchesterSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1988
- Advisory Opinion on Constitutionality of 1986 Pa 281Michigan Supreme Court · 1988
- Long v. NapolitanoCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2002
- South Bend Public Transportation Corp. v. City of South BendIndiana Supreme Court · 1981
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.