Legal Opinion
City of Los Angeles v. Fiske
California Court of Appeal
Decided April 3, 1953No. Civ. 19240PublishedCited by 12 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtMoore, P. J.
This action was instituted to condemn certain parcels of land under the eminent domain power. While no question is raised as to the right of the city to condemn the parcels, a serious controversy rages with respect to the appraisals approved by the court. A reversal of the judgment below is demanded on the ground of alleged inadequacy of the award.
The parcels condemned are included in a subdivided area north of and adjacent to Moorpark Street which runs in an east-west direction. On the west of the subdivision is Laurel Canyon Boulevard, formerly Pacoima Avenue. The tract is-numbered 8582,…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- People v. County of MarinCalifornia Supreme Court · 1894
- Anderson v. Citizens Sav. & Tr. Co.California Supreme Court · 1921
- Hotaling v. HotalingCalifornia Supreme Court · 1922
- Earl v. DutourCalifornia Supreme Court · 1919
- City of San Gabriel v. Pacific Electric Railway Co.California Court of Appeal · 1933
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by12 opinions
- ZACK'S, INC. v. City of SausalitoCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2008
- Clay v. City of Los AngelesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1971
- Cox Cable San Diego, Inc. v. County of San DiegoCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1986
- Midwestern Developments, Inc. v. The City of Tulsa, Oklahoma, a Municipal CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1967
- Main v. LegnittoCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1964
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.