Legal Opinion
Third & Catalina Associates v. City of Phoenix
Court of Appeals of Arizona
Decided August 18, 1994No. 1 CA-CV 93-0337PublishedCited by 20 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
GRANT, Presiding Judge.
In this appeal we are asked to decide whether a City of Phoenix ordinance1 requiring the retrofitting of Third & Catalina Associates’ building with sprinklers is unconstitutional as violating equal protection rights or as a taking without due process of law or just compensation. Third & Catalina Associates .(“appellant”) appeals from summary judgment of the trial court granted in favor of the *205City, affirming the City’s denial of appellant’s requested relief.
FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY
Appellant is the owner of the U.S. West Communications building on Third and…
2Cases cited27 opinions
- City of Cleburne v. Cleburne Living Center, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1985
- Lucas v. South Carolina Coastal CouncilSupreme Court of the United States · 1992
- Heller v. Doe Ex Rel. DoeSupreme Court of the United States · 1993
- City of New Orleans v. DukesSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
- Hodel v. Virginia Surface Mining & Reclamation Assn., Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1981
22 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by20 opinions
- Korean Buddhist Dae Won Sa Temple v. SullivanHawaii Supreme Court · 1998
- Albano v. Shea Homes Ltd. PartnershipCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2011
- Arizona Department of Revenue v. DoughertyArizona Supreme Court · 2001
- Kerr v. WaddellCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1996
- City of Tucson v. GrezaffiCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2001
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.