Riley v. Hilton Hotels Corporation
California Court of Appeal
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
EPSTEIN, J.
A local ordinance was amended during the pendency of a lawsuit to recite that it does not impose the duty that the defendants allegedly breached. In this case, we consider whether the amendment is in fact a substantive change in the law, and if so whether the language of the amending ordinance, and the scant legislative history of record, are adequate to give the change retroactive application. The trial court ruled that the law was indeed changed, but that the change was retroactive. We reverse. We agree with the trial court that the law was substantively changed, but we…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Western Security Bank v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1997
- Gerawan Farming, Inc. v. LyonsCalifornia Supreme Court · 2000
- California Employment Stabilization Commission v. PayneCalifornia Supreme Court · 1947
- Preston v. State Board of EqualizationCalifornia Supreme Court · 2001
- City of Los Angeles v. Rancho Homes, Inc.California Supreme Court · 1953
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- In Re Marriage of FellowsCalifornia Supreme Court · 2006
- Plotkin v. SAJAHTERA, INC.California Court of Appeal · 2003
- Scott v. City of San Diego, California Court of Appeal, 5th District2019
- Moyse v. FellowsCalifornia Supreme Court · 2006
- Cohen v. Super. Ct.California Court of Appeal · 2024
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.