North Hollywood Project Area Committee v. City of Los Angeles

Good Law
1998 Cal. App. LEXIS 123·61 Cal. App. 4th 719·71 Cal. Rptr. 2d 675·98 Daily Journal DAR 1637·98 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 1211
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaFebruary 18, 1998B106500California1,702 words

Opinion

Opinion

Fukuto, J.

Plaintiff North Hollywood Project Area Committee (the PAC) appeals from a judgment and order of dismissal entered in favor of defendants City of Los Angeles (the City) and its community redevelopment agency (the CRA) on July 24, 1996, after the trial court ruled against the PAC and its attorney, C. Robert Ferguson, on their fourth cause of action for declaratory relief and sustained defendants’ demurrer to plaintiffs’ remaining three causes of action without leave to amend. Challenging the trial court’s decision on the declaratory relief cause of action, the PAC contends that under the terms of Health and Safety Code section 33388, it need not accept an attorney chosen by the City, but is entitled to select its own legal counsel and have the cost thereof funded by the City, or by the CRA in accordance with the City’s allocation.

Facts

There are no material disputes regarding the underlying facts in this case. In early 1993, the CRA sought recommendations and comments from the PAC relating to a proposed amendment to the North Hollywood Redevelopment Plan. On May 18, 1993, the PAC requested that the Los Angeles City Council (City Council) “provide funding of $10,000 for…

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.