Cassettari v. Nevada County, Cal., No. 86-2002

CourtUnited States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (9th Circuit)
Writing for the CourtBefore FLETCHER, BEEZER and THOMPSON; DAVID R. THOMPSON
Citation824 F.2d 735
PartiesTerry M. CASSETTARI; FSA Corporation, a California corporation; Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. COUNTY OF NEVADA, CALIFORNIA; Nevada County Building Company, a California corporation; Williams & Paddon, Architects & Planners, Inc.; Defendants- Appellees.
Decision Date10 August 1987
Docket NumberNo. 86-2002

Page 735

824 F.2d 735
Terry M. CASSETTARI; FSA Corporation, a California
corporation; Plaintiffs-Appellants,
v.
COUNTY OF NEVADA, CALIFORNIA; Nevada County Building
Company, a California corporation; Williams &
Paddon, Architects & Planners, Inc.;
Defendants- Appellees.
No. 86-2002.
United States Court of Appeals,
Ninth Circuit.
Argued and Submitted March 10, 1987.
Decided Aug. 10, 1987.

E. John Vodonick, Auburn, Cal., for plaintiffs-appellants.

John P. Byrd and Thomas H. Smith of Barrett, Penney & Byrd, Melvin E. Raatz (argued), Sacramento, Cal., for defendants-appellees.

Page 736

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California.

Before FLETCHER, BEEZER and THOMPSON, Circuit Judges.

DAVID R. THOMPSON, Circuit Judge:

Plaintiffs-appellants Terry M. Cassettari and FSA Corporation 1 (collectively "Cassettari") appeal from the district court's order dismissing federal constitutional and section 1983 claims for failure to state a claim upon which relief could be granted, and dismissing pendent state claims for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. Cassettari alleges that defendant-appellee Nevada County, California (the County) accepted his proposal to build a County Administrative Center (the Center) on property he would acquire (the Narrow Gauge 40 property). He further alleges that after he spent over $450,000 in pre-construction development costs for the Center, the County decided to build the Center elsewhere. Cassettari alleges that the County then bought from defendant-appellee Williams & Paddon, Architects & Planners, Inc. (Williams & Paddon) architectural designs which Cassettari had paid Williams & Paddon to prepare. Cassettari contends that the County's conduct amounted to a taking of his property without just compensation in violation of the fifth amendment, and deprived him of his constitutional rights in violation of 42 U.S.C. Sec. 1983. He also contends that the County, the Nevada County Building Company, 2 and Williams & Paddon conspired to violate his section 1983 rights in violation of 42 U.S.C. Sec. 1985(3). Because Cassettari's allegations do not state federal claims upon which relief may be granted, we affirm the district court's dismissal of the federal claims. We also affirm the dismissal of the pendent state claims.

BACKGROUND

In 1983, Cassettari became aware that the County was interested in building a new administrative center. Cassettari entered into negotiations to acquire the Narrow Gauge 40 property, and offered to dedicate ten acres of the property to the County as a site for the Center. In response to requests by the County, Cassettari made a proposal for development of the site. In November 1983, the County passed a resolution expressing its intent to accept the site and contract with Cassettari to develop the Center, contingent on receipt of a bona fide construction bid.

Cassettari employed Williams & Paddon to prepare architectural designs for the Center, and provided them with "plans, specifications, calculations and the like" supplied by Cassettari's engineers. Williams & Paddon and Cassettari agreed that the architectural designs prepared by Williams & Paddon, as well as the plans and specifications provided by Cassettari's engineers, would be Cassettari's exclusive property. On August 6, 1984, the County entered into a written agreement with Cassettari. This agreement provided that if the County received a bona fide construction bid for the Center it would pay Cassettari $289,252.36 for the architectural designs.

On August 22, 1984, GLM Associates, a construction contractor, submitted a bid to build the Center on the Narrow Gauge 40 property. On August 27, 1984, the County determined by resolution that the bid was not bona fide because it did not include a signed bid bond or a list of subcontractors. Additional bids were taken. The County then determined that none of the bids was bona fide, and on January 7, 1985 it passed a resolution rejecting all bids. The County then decided to consider other sites for the Center, and on March 4, 1985 it selected a site other than Cassettari's. The County then paid Williams & Paddon $202,651 for copies of the architectural designs which they had prepared for Cassettari. Nothing was paid to Cassettari.

Page 737

In addition to the various state claims, Cassettari alleges four federal claims. First, Cassettari contends that the County took without just compensation: (1) his interest in the architectural designs for the administrative center, and (2) part of the value of the Narrow Gauge 40 property. Second, Cassettari asserts that this taking deprived him of constitutional rights in violation of 42 U.S.C. Sec. 1983. Third, Cassettari alleges a conspiracy by the defendants to deprive him of section 1983 rights in violation of 42 U.S.C. Sec. 1985(3). Fourth, Cassettari requests attorney fees under 42 U.S.C. Sec. 1988.

The defendants moved to dismiss the federal claims for failure to state a claim upon which relief could be granted and the state claims for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. The district court granted the defendants' motion. Cassettari then filed an amended complaint, and the County again moved to dismiss. The district court dismissed the fifth amendment "taking" claim as "premature." The district court also dismissed Cassettari's section 1983 claim because "plaintiff [could] allege no facts stating a claim upon which relief can be granted." The court then dismissed the conspiracy and attorney fees claims. Having dismissed all of Cassettari's federal claims, the district court declined to exercise pendent jurisdiction over the state claims and dismissed those as well. Cassettari appeals. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. Sec. 1291.

STANDARD OF REVIEW

We review de novo a district court's dismissal of claims for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. Jones v. Johnson, 781 F.2d 769, 771 (9th Cir.1986). An action may be dismissed for failure to state a claim only if "it appears beyond doubt that the plaintiff can prove no set of facts in support of his claim which would entitle him to relief." Gibson v. United States, 781 F.2d 1334, 1337 (9th Cir.1986) (citations omitted), cert. denied, --- U.S. ----, 107 S.Ct. 928, 93 L.Ed.2d 979 (1987). Our review is limited to the contents of the complaint, and all allegations of material fact must be taken as true and construed in the light most favorable to the non-moving party. Western Reserve Oil & Gas Co. v. New, 765 F.2d 1428, 1430 (9th Cir.1985), cert. denied, 474 U.S. 1056, 106 S.Ct. 795, 88 L.Ed.2d 773 (1986).

DISCUSSION

A. The Fifth Amendment Taking Claim

Cassettari contends that the County's conduct "resulted in a permanent and substantial interference with Plaintiffs' use and enjoyment of their property rights amounting to a taking of an interest in Plaintiffs' property and property rights, without compensation, in violation of the Fifth...

To continue reading

Request your trial
105 practice notes
  • Katzman v. L.A. Cnty. Metro. Transp. Auth., Case No.: 13–CV–00438–LHK
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 9th Circuit. United States District Courts. 9th Circuit. Northern District of California
    • November 4, 2014
    ...itself a constitutional tort under § 1983. Lacey v. Maricopa County, 693 F.3d 896, 935 (9th Cir.2012) (citing Cassettari v. Nev. County, 824 F.2d 735, 739 (9th Cir.1987) ). “Conspiracy may, however, enlarge the pool of responsible defendants by demonstrating their causal connections to the ......
  • Von Grabe v. Sprint Pcs, No. 02 CV 0048 JFS.
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 9th Circuit. United States District Court (Southern District of California)
    • September 18, 2003
    ...of material fact are taken as true and viewed in the light most favorable to the non-moving party. See Cassettari v. Nevada County, Cal., 824 F.2d 735, 737 (9th Defendant Sprint PCS asks this Court to dismiss Plaintiff's claims, asserting that all of Plaintiff's claims fail to meet the requ......
  • Organics v. Cnty. of San Diego, Case No.: 15-CV-854 JLS (MDD)
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 9th Circuit. United States District Court (Southern District of California)
    • September 18, 2018
    ...constitutional violation." Lacey v. Maricopa Cnty. , 693 F.3d 896, 935 (9th Cir. 2012) (en banc) (citing Cassettari v. Nev. Cnty. , 824 F.2d 735, 739 (9th Cir. 1987) ("The insufficiency of these allegations to support a section 1983 violation precludes a conspiracy claim predicated upon the......
  • Pande Cameron and Co. of Seattle, Inc. v. Central Puget Sound Reg. Transit Authority, Case No. 07-cv-1312-JPD.
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 9th Circuit. United States District Court (Western District of Washington)
    • March 20, 2009
    ...("[T]he Just Compensation Clause has never been held to require pretaking process or compensation."); Cassettari v. County of Nevada, 824 F.2d 735, 738-39 (9th Cir.1987) ("The Constitution ... does not require a state to provide pre-taking notice, an opportunity to be heard, or pretaking co......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
105 cases
  • Katzman v. L.A. Cnty. Metro. Transp. Auth., Case No.: 13–CV–00438–LHK
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 9th Circuit. United States District Courts. 9th Circuit. Northern District of California
    • November 4, 2014
    ...itself a constitutional tort under § 1983. Lacey v. Maricopa County, 693 F.3d 896, 935 (9th Cir.2012) (citing Cassettari v. Nev. County, 824 F.2d 735, 739 (9th Cir.1987) ). “Conspiracy may, however, enlarge the pool of responsible defendants by demonstrating their causal connections to the ......
  • Von Grabe v. Sprint Pcs, No. 02 CV 0048 JFS.
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 9th Circuit. United States District Court (Southern District of California)
    • September 18, 2003
    ...of material fact are taken as true and viewed in the light most favorable to the non-moving party. See Cassettari v. Nevada County, Cal., 824 F.2d 735, 737 (9th Defendant Sprint PCS asks this Court to dismiss Plaintiff's claims, asserting that all of Plaintiff's claims fail to meet the requ......
  • Organics v. Cnty. of San Diego, Case No.: 15-CV-854 JLS (MDD)
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 9th Circuit. United States District Court (Southern District of California)
    • September 18, 2018
    ...constitutional violation." Lacey v. Maricopa Cnty. , 693 F.3d 896, 935 (9th Cir. 2012) (en banc) (citing Cassettari v. Nev. Cnty. , 824 F.2d 735, 739 (9th Cir. 1987) ("The insufficiency of these allegations to support a section 1983 violation precludes a conspiracy claim predicated upon the......
  • Pande Cameron and Co. of Seattle, Inc. v. Central Puget Sound Reg. Transit Authority, Case No. 07-cv-1312-JPD.
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 9th Circuit. United States District Court (Western District of Washington)
    • March 20, 2009
    ...("[T]he Just Compensation Clause has never been held to require pretaking process or compensation."); Cassettari v. County of Nevada, 824 F.2d 735, 738-39 (9th Cir.1987) ("The Constitution ... does not require a state to provide pre-taking notice, an opportunity to be heard, or pretaking co......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT