Legal Opinion
City of Oceanside v. McKenna
California Court of Appeal
Decided November 22, 1989No. D008264PublishedCited by 13 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
TODD, J.
Here, we consider whether the covenants, conditions and restrictions (CC&Rs) of a publicly subsidized condominium project validly can require owner occupancy and forbid the leasing of units. Michael Shawn McKenna appeals from a judgment against him on the City of Oceanside’s (City) suit for injunctive and declaratory relief seeking to enforce such restrictions at the Sea Village condominium project, a part of the City’s downtown redevelopment program.
Facts
Sea Village is a condominium 1 project that was developed on property within the coastal zone as part of the City’s…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Kent v. DullesSupreme Court of the United States · 1958
- Attorney General of New York v. Soto-LopezSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- McCarthy v. Philadelphia Civil Service CommissionSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
- Wellenkamp v. Bank of AmericaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1978
- Hidden Harbour Estates, Inc. v. NormanDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1975
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by13 opinions
- Alfaro v. Community Housing Improvement System & Planning Assn., Inc.California Court of Appeal · 2009
- Wilson v. Blue Cross of Southern CaliforniaCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1990
- Shorewood West Condominium Ass'n v. SadriCourt of Appeals of Washington · 1998
- Portola Hills Community Assn. v. JamesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1992
- Mission Shores Assn. v. PheilCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2008
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.