Legal Opinion
City & County of San Francisco v. Safeway Stores, Inc.
California Court of Appeal
Decided April 22, 1957No. Civ. No. 17230PublishedCited by 11 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtBray, J.
Plaintiff sued to have defendant’s use of a certain traffic easement for ingress to and egress from its property upon which its store is located, by its customers and others, declared a public nuisance and enjoined. Defendant appeals from a judgment in plaintiff’s favor.
Questions Presented
1. Is the use of a traffic easement in a residential zone for purposes of ingress and egress to a parking lot on mercantile store premises by the general public, delivery trucks, etc., a violation of the zoning restrictions?
2. Is such a violation a public nuisance ?
Facts
There is no conflict in the evidence,…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- City of Los Angeles v. GageCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1954
- Wheeler v. GreggCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1949
- City of Yonkers v. Rentways, Inc.New York Court of Appeals · 1952
- Faulkner v. KeeneSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1931
- Town of Brookline v. Co-Ray Realty Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1950
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- Rush v. City of GreenvilleSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1965
- BBJ Associates, LLC v. Zoning Board of AppealsAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2009
- Kappadahl v. Alcan Pacific Co.California Court of Appeal · 1963
- Atria, Inc. v. Mount Lebanon Township Board of AdjustmentSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1970
- City of Providence v. First National Stores, Inc.Supreme Court of Rhode Island · 1965
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.