Legal Opinion
Greenfield v. Mandalay Shores Cmty. Ass'n
California Court of Appeal, 5th District
Decided March 27, 2018No. 2d Civil No. B281089PublishedCited by 9 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtYegan, Acting P. J.
*898One of the basic goals of the California Coastal Act of 1976 is to "maximize public access" to the beach. An appellate court is to liberally construe the Coastal Act to achieve this goal. Respondent Mandalay Shores Community Association has not erected a physical barrier to the beach but has erected a monetary barrier to the beach. (See infra at p. 829.) It has no right to do so.
Robert S. Greenfield and Demetra Greenfield appeal the denial of their motion for a preliminary injunction to stay the enforcement of a homeowner's association resolution banning short term rentals (STR ban) in Oxnard…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Pacific Palisades Bowl Mobile Estates, LLC v. City of Los AngelesCalifornia Supreme Court · 2012
- MHC Operating Limited Partnership v. City of San JoseCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2003
- Hines v. California Coastal CommissionCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2010
- California Coastal Commission v. Quanta Investment Corp.California Court of Appeal · 1980
- LT-WR, L.L.C. v. California Coastal CommissionCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2007
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- Fudge v. City of Laguna Beach, California Court of Appeal, 5th District2019
- Coastal Protection Alliance v. AirbnbCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2023
- Fudge v. City of Laguna BeachCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2019
- Fudge v. City of Laguna BeachCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2019
- Keen v. City of Manhattan BeachCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2022
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.