Santa Monica Beach, Ltd. v. Superior Court
California Supreme Court
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
MOSK, J.
In this case we consider whether a trial court properly sustained a demurrer to a complaint alleging that a city’s rent control law violates the *957takings clause of the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution and the equivalent provision under the California Constitution because of that law’s alleged failure to fulfill its stated objectives. We conclude that the trial court was correct to sustain the Santa Monica Rent Control Board’s demurrer to petitioner’s cause of action for inverse condemnation, and we accordingly reverse the Court of Appeal’s judgment.
I. Statement…
2Cases cited31 opinions
- Penn Central Transportation Co. v. New York CitySupreme Court of the United States · 1978
- Lucas v. South Carolina Coastal CouncilSupreme Court of the United States · 1992
- Turner Broadcasting System, Inc. v. Federal Communications CommissionSupreme Court of the United States · 1994
- Nordlinger v. HahnSupreme Court of the United States · 1992
- Nollan v. California Coastal CommissionSupreme Court of the United States · 1987
26 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by66 opinions
- Kasky v. Nike, Inc.California Supreme Court · 2002
- McCall v. PacifiCare of California, Inc.California Supreme Court · 2001
- Kasky v. Nike, Inc.California Supreme Court · 2003
- Action Apartment Ass'n v. City of Santa MonicaCalifornia Supreme Court · 2007
- Chevron USA, Inc. v. CayetanoCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2000
61 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.