Legal Opinion
Brandenburg v. EUREKA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
California Court of Appeal
Decided July 2, 2007No. A114366PublishedCited by 14 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
STEIN, J.
Sue C. Brandenburg (plaintiff) appeals from a judgment entered in favor of defendants Eureka Redevelopment Agency, Eureka Waterfront Partners and Dolores Vellutini (defendants) after the court sustained, without leave to amend, defendants’ demurrer to her first amended complaint on the ground that it was filed after the statute of limitations had expired.
We shall affirm the judgment.
Facts
The original complaint was filed on September 12, 2005. The first amended complaint alleged that, pursuant to the provisions of Health and Safety Code section 33200, the City Council of Eureka…
2Cases cited23 opinions
- Murphy v. Kenneth Cole Productions, Inc.California Supreme Court · 2007
- Thomson v. CallCalifornia Supreme Court · 1985
- Schaefer v. BerinsteinCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1956
- Stockton Plumbing & Supply Co. v. WheelerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1924
- Moss v. MossCalifornia Supreme Court · 1942
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by14 opinions
- Lexin v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 2010
- Dennis Sharkey v. Eral O'NealCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2015
- Bank of New York Mellon v. Citibank, N.A.California Court of Appeal · 2017
- Chung Kao v. Department of Corrections & RehabilitationCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2016
- Universal Trading & Investment Co. v. Dugsbery, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2012
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.