Boxer v. City of Beverly Hills
| Docket Number | B258459 |
| Decision Date | 26 April 2016 |
-
- This document is available in original version only for vLex customers
View this document and try vLex for 7 days - TRY VLEX
- This document is available in original version only for vLex customers
11 cases
-
Eisen v. Tavangarian
...an unobstructed view over adjoining property, and " ‘the law is reluctant to imply such a right.’ " ( Boxer v. City of Beverly Hills (2016) 246 Cal.App.4th 1212, 1219, 201 Cal.Rptr.3d 371 ; accord, Pacifica Homeowners' Assn. v. Wesley Palms Retirement Community (1986) 178 Cal.App.3d 1147, 1......
-
Mercury Cas. Co. v. City of Pasadena
...v. Superior Court (2014) 228 Cal.App.4th 1228, 1234, 176 Cal.Rptr.3d 422 ( City of Pasadena ); Boxer v. City of Beverly Hills (2016) 246 Cal.App.4th 1212, 201 Cal.Rptr.3d 371 ( Boxer ).) Only two of those opinions, Regency and City of Pasadena , discussed whether a city-owned tree qualifies......
-
Scheiber Ranch Props. v. City of Lincoln
...a burden on the property that is direct, substantial, and peculiar to the property itself.'" (Boxer v. City of Beverly Hills (2016) 246 Cal.App.4th 1212, 1218, italics omitted.) The second amended writ petition and complaint alleged a physical taking: under the Specific Plan, Lincoln would ......
-
Weiss v. People ex rel. Dep't of Transp.
...his or her property before he or she can reach the issue of ‘just compensation.’ " ' " ( Boxer v. City of Beverly Hills (2016) 246 Cal.App.4th 1212, 1218, 201 Cal.Rptr.3d 371 ( Boxer ).) Contrary to their position below, the Agencies now concede section 1260.040"does not directly apply to i......
Request a trial to view additional results