Legal Opinion

Stubblefield Construction Co. v. City of San Bernardino

California Court of Appeal

Decided January 27, 1995No. Docket Nos. E009749, E010088PublishedCited by 30 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

HOLLENHORST, J.

This is an action for violation of plaintiffs’ civil rights under 42 United States Code section 1983. The action arose out of defendant city’s handling of plaintiffs’ application to build apartment buildings on a 29.3-acre parcel in the northeastern foothills of the city. Plaintiffs contend that the city violated their substantive due process and equal protection rights by allegedly deliberately inflicting harm “when [city officials] irrationally and arbitrarily manipulated City processes and procedures, for no legitimate reason, so as to prevent Stubblefield from…

2Cases cited51 opinions

  1. Monell v. New York City Dept. of Social Servs.Supreme Court of the United States · 1978
  2. Board of Regents of State Colleges v. RothSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
  3. Hudson v. PalmerSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
  4. Daniels v. WilliamsSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
  5. Parratt v. TaylorSupreme Court of the United States · 1981

46 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by30 opinions

  1. OCM Principal Opportunities Fund, L.P. v. CIBC World Markets Corp.California Court of Appeal · 2007
  2. Clark v. City of Hermosa BeachCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1996
  3. Las Lomas Land Company, LLC v. City of Los AngelesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2009
  4. Iwekaogwu v. City of Los AngelesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1999
  5. Genesis Environmental Services v. San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control DistrictCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2003

25 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API