Karl O. Hoehne and Phyllis Hoehne v. County of San Benito Henry Solorio Frank Sabbatini Enos Silva and Edward Lydon
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
1Opinion of the Court
ALDISERT, Circuit Judge:
We are to decide, under the specific facts in this case, whether the district court erred in dismissing for lack of ripeness the complaint of San Benito County, California, landowners Karl 0. Hoehne and Phyllis Hoehne, filed against the County of San Benito and certain County officials. The court ruled that the Hoehnes’ claims were not ripe because there had been no final decision by the County concerning the Hoehnes’ land-use application. If a final decision had been made by County authorities, the Hoehnes were eligible to seek federal relief; if no such decision was…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- Penn Central Transportation Co. v. New York CitySupreme Court of the United States · 1978
- Williamson County Regional Planning Commission v. Hamilton Bank of Johnson CitySupreme Court of the United States · 1985
- Hodel v. Virginia Surface Mining & Reclamation Assn., Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1981
- First English Evangelical Lutheran Church v. County of Los AngelesSupreme Court of the United States · 1987
- Agins v. City of TiburonSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by82 opinions
- Mayhew v. Town of SunnyvaleTexas Supreme Court · 1998
- Thomas Dodd and Doris Dodd v. Hood River County, an Oregon Municipal Corporation, and State of Oregon, Defendant-Intervenor-AppelleeCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1995
- Del Monte Dunes at Monterey, Ltd. Monterey-Del Monte Dunes Corporation v. City of MontereyCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1990
- Guatay Christian Fellowship v. County of San DiegoCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2011
- Richard Silver Silver Construction Company v. Franklin Township, Board of Zoning AppealsCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1992
77 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.