Guggenheim v. City of Goleta
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by Judge KLEINFELD; Dissent by Judge BEA.
OPINION
KLEINFELD, Circuit Judge:
We address the viability of a takings claim arising out of a rent control ordinance affecting mobile home parks.
I. Facts
In 1979, Santa Barbara County, California adopted a rent control ordinance for mobile homes. 1 Mobile homes have the peculiar characteristic of separating ownership of homes that are, as a practical matter, affixed to the land, from the land itself. 2 Because the owner of the mobile home cannot readily move it to get a lower rent, the owner of the land has the owner of the mobile home over a…
Also in this document: Dissent.
2Cases cited38 opinions
- Lujan v. Defenders of WildlifeSupreme Court of the United States · 1992
- Railroad Comm'n of Tex. v. Pullman Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1941
- Penn Central Transportation Co. v. New York CitySupreme Court of the United States · 1978
- Williamson County Regional Planning Commission v. Hamilton Bank of Johnson CitySupreme Court of the United States · 1985
- Pennsylvania Coal Co. v. MahonSupreme Court of the United States · 1922
33 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Capri Mobile Villa LLC v. City of PetalumaDistrict Court, N.D. California · 2026
- Rose v. Fresno Food Concept, Inc.District Court, E.D. California · 2022
- Rosedale Missionary Baptist v. New Orleans CityCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 2011