CONSOLIDATED ROCK PRODUCTS CO. ET AL.

v.

CITY OF LOS ANGELES

Citator

Cited By

• Lucas v. S.C. Coastal Council, 505 U.S. 1003 (U.S. 1992)
  …dvertisement Co. v. St. Louis, 235 Mo. 99, 146, 137 S. W. 929, 942 (1911), appeal dism’d, 231 U. S. 761 (1913). More recent cases reach the same result. See Consolidated Rock Products Co. v. Los Angeles, 57 Cal. 2d 515, 370 P. 2d 342, appeal dism’d, 371 U. S. 36 (1962); Nassr v. [*1059] Commonwealth, 394 Mass. 767, 477 N. E. 2d 987 (1985); Eno v. Burlington, 125 Vt. 8, 209 A. 2d 499 (1965); Turner v. County of Del Norte, 24 Cal. App. 3d 311, 101 Cal. Rptr. 93 (1972). In addition, state courts historically…

  ← 1 / 2 →
• Keystone Bituminous Coal Assn. v. Debenedictis, 480 U.S. 470 (U.S. 1987)
  …quent cases reaffirm the important role that the nature of the state action plays in our takings analysis. See Goldblatt v. Hempstead, 369 U. S. 590 (1962); Consolidated Rock Products Co. v. Los Angeles, 57 Cal. 2d 515, 370 P. 2d 342, appeal dism’d, 371 U. S. 36 (1962). As the Court explained in Goldblatt: “Although a comparison of values before and after” a regulatory action “is relevant, ... it is by no means conclusive . . . .” 369 U. S., at 594.19 [*491] The Court’s hesitance to find a taking when the…
• Cabrera v. Municipality OF Bayamon, 562 F.2d 91 (1st Cir. 1977)
  …143, 60 L.Ed. 348 (1915) (legislative prohibition destroying 90 percent of value of property); Consolidated Rock Products Co. v. Los Angeles, 57 Cal.2d 515, 20 Cal.Rptr. 638, 370 P. 2d 342, appeal dismissed for want of substantial federal question, 371 U.S. 36, 83 S.Ct. 145,9 L.Ed.2d 112 (1962) (zoning ordinance destroying value of land). Although there is language in several Supreme Court decisions to the effect that the extent of the diminution of value is relevant, see Goldblatt v. Hempstead, 369 U.S.…