Legal Opinion
Consaul v. City of San Diego
California Court of Appeal
Decided June 1, 1992No. D012162PublishedCited by 15 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
HUFFMAN, Acting P. J.
The issue presented in this appeal of the superior court’s order denying a petition for writ of mandate brought by appellants Robert and Eva Consaul and Thomas Ahrens is whether certain dwelling unit allocations made by the City of San Diego (the city) to Ahrens’s development project, under the terms of an interim development ordinance (IDO), created a vested right in Ahrens to proceed with the development of the project, even though no building permits were applied for or obtained as contemplated by the IDO procedure. We conclude the trial court correctly denied…
2Cases cited24 opinions
- Nollan v. California Coastal CommissionSupreme Court of the United States · 1987
- Agins v. City of TiburonSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
- Denham v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1970
- Bixby v. PiernoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1971
- Agins v. City of TiburonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1979
19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by15 opinions
- Kawaoka v. City of Arroyo GrandeCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1994
- Toigo v. Town of RossCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1998
- Kawaoka v. City of Arroyo GrandeCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1994
- Hermosa Beach Stop Oil Coalition v. City of Hermosa BeachCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2001
- Epstein v. Hollywood Entertainment District II Business Improvement DistrictCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2001
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.