Legal Opinion
Richmond Elks Hall Ass'n v. Richmond Redevelopment Agency
District Court, N.D. California
Decided February 19, 1975No. C-72-2275PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR LITIGATION EXPENSES AND AWARDING PLAINTIFF COSTS OF SUIT
WOLLENBERG, District Judge.
Plaintiff brought this inverse condemnation action against Defendant Rich*487mond Redevelopment Agency under the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution.1 On September 17, 1974, this Court filed Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law as to all Issues, Save and Except for Litigation Expenses, finding Richmond Redevelopment Agency had taken Plaintiff’s property without just compensation.2 The case is now before the Court on Plaintiff’s motion for litigation expenses,…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Erie Railroad v. TompkinsSupreme Court of the United States · 1938
- Mills v. Electric Auto-Lite Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1970
- F. D. Rich Co. v. United States Ex Rel. Industrial Lumber Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1974
- Unida v. VolpeDistrict Court, N.D. California · 1972
- Continental Casualty Co. v. SchaeferCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1949
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Monell v. New York City Dept. of Social Servs.Supreme Court of the United States · 1978
- Government of the Virgin Islands v. Approximately 3.4 Acres of Land Located at Parcels No. 4-2 & 4-3 Estate EnsomhedDistrict Court, Virgin Islands · 1975
- Harding v. State ex rel. Department of Natural ResourcesIndiana Court of Appeals · 1975
- All American Pipeline Co. v. KlumpCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1987
- Monell v. New York City Dept. of Social Servs.Supreme Court of the United States · 1978