Legal Opinion
Walter Camp v. Board of Supervisors
California Court of Appeal
Decided September 1, 1981No. Docket Nos. 45922, 48356, 48357PublishedCited by 56 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
RATTIGAN, J.
The Planning and Zoning Law (Gov. Code, tit. 7, div. 1, commencing with § 65000) required in 1978 (as it does now) that the board of supervisors of each county adopt a general plan for the “physical development” of the county, pursuant to section 65300; that the plan be prepared and adopted according to standards established in sections 65300.5 and 65301; and that it include each of nine “elements” enumerated and described in section 65302. As the result of several enactments adopted over a course of years, the Board of Supervisors of the County of Mendocino (hereinafter…
2Cases cited24 opinions
- Parsons v. Bristol Development Co.California Supreme Court · 1965
- D'AMICO v. Board of Medical ExaminersCalifornia Supreme Court · 1974
- Bodinson Manufacturing Co. v. California Employment CommissionCalifornia Supreme Court · 1941
- Selby Realty Co. v. City of San BuenaventuraCalifornia Supreme Court · 1973
- Bank of California v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1940
19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by56 opinions
- Hensler v. City of GlendaleCalifornia Supreme Court · 1994
- Hunt v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1999
- Federation of Hillside & Canyon Associations v. City of Los AngelesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2004
- Kings County Farm Bureau v. City of HanfordCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1990
- Rockridge Trust v. Wells Fargo, N.A.District Court, N.D. California · 2013
51 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.