From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Kinzli; v. City of Santa Cruz

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
Aug 7, 1987
830 F.2d 968 (9th Cir. 1987)

Summary

In Kinzli, supra, 830 F.2d 968, the court stated that First English "explicitly distinguished cases such as this one in which `the factual disputes yet to be resolved by state authorities might still lead to the conclusion that no taking had occurred.

Summary of this case from Tahoe Regional Planning Agency v. King

Opinion

Nos. 86-1504, 86-1624.

August 7, 1987.

Before GOODWIN, PREGERSON, and HALL, Circuit Judges.


ORDER AMENDING OPINION

The opinion filed June 4, 1987, 818 F.2d 1449, is amended at the slip op. page 13, second paragraph, after the sentence ending "denying them a variance." [page 1455, 2d col. line 9] by inserting the following footnote:

[*] In their petition for rehearing, the Kinzlis erroneously argue that their takings claim is ripe under the Supreme Court's recent decision in First English Evangelical Lutheran Church of Glendale v. County of Los Angeles, ___ U.S. ___, 107 S.Ct. 2378, 96 L.Ed.2d 250 (1987). In First English Evangelical, the Supreme Court held that the question of whether the fifth amendment requires compensation for regulatory takings which are ultimately invalidated by the courts was ripe for consideration. The Court based its decision on the fact that the state court below had assumed that a taking had occurred, denying compensation on the ground that the only remedy for a regulatory taking is nonmonetary relief. ___ U.S. at ___-___, 107 S.Ct. at 2383. The Court explicitly distinguished cases such as this one in which "the factual disputes yet to be resolved by state authorities might still lead to the conclusion that no taking had occurred," or to the conclusion that "just compensation" had been paid. ___ U.S. at ___-___ n. 6, 107 S.Ct. at 2383-84 n. 6 (distinguishing the MacDonald, Sommer Frates line of cases).


Summaries of

Kinzli; v. City of Santa Cruz

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
Aug 7, 1987
830 F.2d 968 (9th Cir. 1987)

In Kinzli, supra, 830 F.2d 968, the court stated that First English "explicitly distinguished cases such as this one in which `the factual disputes yet to be resolved by state authorities might still lead to the conclusion that no taking had occurred.

Summary of this case from Tahoe Regional Planning Agency v. King
Case details for

Kinzli; v. City of Santa Cruz

Case Details

Full title:MARGARET KINZLI; EVELYN GOOSSEN; PHILIP KINZLI; ERNEST KINZLI…

Court:United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit

Date published: Aug 7, 1987

Citations

830 F.2d 968 (9th Cir. 1987)

Citing Cases

Tahoe Regional Planning Agency v. King

(Duffy v. City of Long Beach (1988) 201 Cal.App.3d 1352, 1358-1359, 247 Cal.Rptr. 715; Guinnane v. City and…

Tahoe Regional Planning Agency v. King

Cases since First English have made it clear that courts must still engage in a particularized analysis of…