Legal Opinion

J. Arthur Props., II, LLC v. City of San Jose

California Court of Appeal, 5th District

Decided March 19, 2018No. H042938PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtGrover, J.

*482Plaintiff SV Care operated a medical marijuana collective in a commercial zoning district in San Jose. Plaintiff J. Arthur Properties, II, *483LLC owns the building in which SV Care operated. Defendants City of San Jose and City of San Jose Appeals Hearing Board (collectively, the City) determined that a medical marijuana collective was not an authorized use of the subject property and ordered the collective to close. Plaintiffs appeal the denial of their petition for writ of administrative mandate, arguing that the collective is a legal nonconforming use and that the City should be equitably…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. Yamaha Corp. of America v. State Board of EqualizationCalifornia Supreme Court · 1998
  2. Hughes v. Board of Architectural ExaminersCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1998
  3. People v. AriasCalifornia Supreme Court · 2008
  4. Steinhart v. County of Los AngelesCalifornia Supreme Court · 2010
  5. Alan v. American Honda Motor Co., Inc.California Supreme Court · 2007

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

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. California Renters Legal Advocacy and Education Fund v. City of San Mateo 9/10/2 Case Details Related Case: A159658California Court of Appeal · 2021
  2. Committee to Relocate Marilyn v. City of Palm SpringsCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2023
  3. Committee to Relocate Marilyn v. City of Palm SpringsCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2023
  4. Joseph v. City of San JoseDistrict Court, N.D. California · 2020
  5. Kent v. County of YoloDistrict Court, E.D. California · 2019

1 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