Anaheim Redevelopment Agency v. Dusek Anaheim Redevelopment Agency v. Dusek

Anaheim Redevelopment Agency v. Dusek

CA.40547; 193 Cal. App. 3d 249; 239 Cal. Rptr. 319 (1987)

    • 0,99 €
    • 0,99 €

Publisher Description

[193 CalApp3d Page 252] The Anaheim Redevelopment Agency (Agency) appeals a judgment dismissing its complaint in eminent domain to acquire the Duseks' Pickwick Hotel. Appalled by what they contend was judicial usurpation of a legislative function, the Agency and amici curiae argue the trial court erred by granting the Duseks' motion for judgment (Code Civ. Proc., ? 631.8)1 based on the failure to include specific findings of fact in a resolution of necessity. In this case of first impression we must decide whether the Legislature intended to impose a duty on all condemning agencies to make specific factual findings in their resolutions of necessity. We also tackle the thorny issues of whether such resolutions are adjudicative or legislative and whether our characterization is consistent with the legislative intent.

GENRE
Professional & Technical
RELEASED
1987
30 June
LANGUAGE
EN
English
LENGTH
25
Pages
PUBLISHER
LawApp Publishers
SIZE
79.3
KB

More Books by Fourth Appellate District, Division Three Court of Appeal of California

Zambrano v. Dorough Zambrano v. Dorough
1986
Haight v. Handweiler Haight v. Handweiler
1988
Little v. Harbor Pacific Mortgage Investors No. 79B Little v. Harbor Pacific Mortgage Investors No. 79B
1985
Hollingsworth v. Superior Court of Orange County Hollingsworth v. Superior Court of Orange County
1987
State Farm Fire and Casualty Co. v. Superior Court of Orange County State Farm Fire and Casualty Co. v. Superior Court of Orange County
1987
Taylor v. Bouissiere Taylor v. Bouissiere
1987