Legal Opinion
Redevelopment Agency v. Rados Bros.
California Court of Appeal
Decided January 15, 2002No. D037231PublishedCited by 17 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
HUFFMAN, Acting P. J.
In this eminent domain action, plaintiff Redevelopment Agency of the City of Chula Vista (the Agency) appeals a judgment of dismissal in favor of defendant Rados Bros. (Rados). The Agency persuasively contends the trial court erred by determining the acquisition of the Rados property was not for a public use, the property was not necessary for the redevelopment project in question and the acquisition would be an unlawful de facto taking by the San Diego Unified Port District (Port District). We reverse the judgment and remand the matter to the trial court.
Factual…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- Berman v. ParkerSupreme Court of the United States · 1954
- Redevelopment Agency v. HayesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1954
- Shapell Industries, Inc. v. Governing BoardCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1991
- Troensegaard v. Silvercrest Industries, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 1985
- Burbank-Glendale-Pasadena Airport Authority v. HenslerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1991
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by17 opinions
- Kelo v. City of New LondonSupreme Court of the United States · 2005
- Wilson & Wilson v. City CouncilCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2011
- Air Couriers International v. Employment Development DepartmentCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2007
- Gilroy Citizens for Responsible Planning v. City of GilroyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2006
- Santa Clarita Organization for Planning & the Environment v. Castaic Lake Water AgencyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2016
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.