Introducing ATLASLearn more
Legal Opinion

Fellom v. Redevelopment Agency

California Court of Appeal

Decided January 29, 1958No. Civ. 17715PublishedCited by 11 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

McMURRAY, J. pro tem. *

This is an appeal by plaintiffs from a judgment after order sustaining defendants’ demurrer to plaintiffs’ complaint without leave to amend.

Appellants are the owners of three separate vacant and unimproved parcels of land in the Diamond Heights District in San Francisco. Respondent Redevelopment Agency has designated Diamond Heights a blighted area and approved it for redevelopment under the Community Redevelopment Law (Health & Saf. Code, § 33000 et seq.), with approval for redevelopment by the Board of Supervisors of the City and County of San Francisco having been…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Berman v. ParkerSupreme Court of the United States · 1954
  2. The Housing Authority v. DockweilerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1939
  3. Redevelopment Agency v. HayesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1954
  4. Housing Authority v. City of Los AngelesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1952
  5. Fraenkel v. Bank of America National Trust & Savings Ass'nCalifornia Supreme Court · 1953

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

3Cited by11 opinions

  1. In Re Redevelopment Plan for Bunker Hill v. GoldmanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1964
  2. Anaheim Redevelopment Agency v. DusekCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1987
  3. Hunter v. AdamsCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1960
  4. Huntington Park Redevelopment Agency v. DuncanCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1983
  5. Redevelopment Agency v. Rados Bros.California Court of Appeal · 2002

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

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

View API DocsGet API Key

Powered by the Exa API