Gleason

Gleason v. City of Santa Monica

Good Law
1962 Cal. App. LEXIS 1930·207 Cal. App. 2d 458·24 Cal. Rptr. 656
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaSeptember 6, 1962Civ. 25995California1,720 words

Opinion

Opinion

Fox, J.

This is an appeal by plaintiffs from a judgment of dismissal entered after a demurrer to plaintiffs’ fifth amended complaint was sustained without leave to amend.

Plaintiffs’ complaint for declaratory relief sought a declaration that -. certain provisions of the California Redevelopment Law are unconstitutional; appropriations made by the City of Santa Monica to the Redevelopment Agency are ultra vires and illegal expenditures of municipal funds; the Redevelopment Agency of Santa Monica has received funds from the City of Santa Monica without any authority of law; an ordinance approving and adopting a redevelopment plan in the City of Santa Monica is unconstitutional; and the use of any federal or municipal funds derived from the sale of bonds or otherwise, in furtherance of the redevelopment plan adopted by the City Council of the City of Santa Monica, is in violation of section 1460 of the Federal Urban Renewal Act.

The sole basis upon which the demurrer was sustained without leave to amend was on the ground that “the amended complaint does not state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action in that the alleged cause of action appears to be barred by the provisions of…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.