People v. Pacific Landmark
California Court of Appeal
[CERTIFIED FOR PARTIAL PUBLICATION*]
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
ALDRICH, J.
INTRODUCTION
The City of Los Angeles and the People of the State of California (collectively, the City) brought a red light abatement action (Pen. Code, § 11225) against the operators of a business and the owners of the strip mall where the business was located. The action alleged that the business was a front for prostitution and an illegal massage parlor. The trial court issued a preliminary injunction prohibiting the operation of a massage parlor or a house of prostitution. Pacific Landmark, LLC (Pacific), a limited liability company and owner of the property, and Ron…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Dyna-Med, Inc. v. Fair Employment & Housing CommissionCalifornia Supreme Court · 1987
- United States v. ParkSupreme Court of the United States · 1975
- United States Liability Insurance v. Haidinger-Hayes, Inc.California Supreme Court · 1970
- City of Santa Cruz v. Municipal CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1989
- Paclink Communications International, Inc. v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2001
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by26 opinions
- Gottlieb v. KestCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2006
- D'Elia v. Rice Development, Inc.Court of Appeals of Utah · 2006
- Troutwine Estates Development Co. v. ComSub Design & Engineering, Inc.Indiana Court of Appeals · 2006
- Bonfigli v. StrachanCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2011
- Kennedy v. KennedyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2015
21 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.