Legal Opinion
Brown v. City of Los Angeles
California Court of Appeal
Decided December 4, 1968No. Civ. 32290PublishedCited by 21 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtFleming, J.
The question: Does appellant’s second amended complaint state a cause of action against the City of Los Angeles ?
According to her pleading appellant operated a therapeutic massage parlor and income tax service on leased premises in the City of Los Angeles. On 13 February 1963 she was noti tied by the City, acting through its Department of Building and Safety, that the operation of a massage parlor and income tax service in a residential zone violated the Los Angeles Municipal Code and should be discontinued immediately. On receiving this notice appellant went to the zoning office of the…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- County of Los Angeles v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1965
- Heieck and Moran v. City of ModestoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1966
3Cited by21 opinions
- State of California v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1974
- Nuveen Municipal High Income Opportunity Fund v. City of AlamedaCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2013
- Schonfeld v. City of VallejoCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1975
- Universal By-Products, Inc. v. City of ModestoCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1974
- Randle v. City and County of San FranciscoCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1986
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.