Stokes

Stokes v. Board of Permit Appeals

Good Law
1997 Cal. App. LEXIS 125·52 Cal. App. 4th 1348·61 Cal. Rptr. 2d 181·97 Daily Journal DAR 1911·97 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 1311
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJanuary 24, 1997A070653California3,215 words

Opinion

Opinion

Phelan, J.

The trial court denied plaintiff Earl Rick Stokes’ petition for a writ of administrative mandate (Code Civ. Proc., § 1094.5) which sought an order requiring the building inspector for defendant City and County of San Francisco (the City) to reissue a building permit. We affirm.

Factual and Procedural Background

The evidence is substantially undisputed. In March 1993, Stokes purchased a three-story building located at 132 Turk Street. Until 1984, and no later than 1987, the property had been used as a public bathhouse. Beginning in 1984, the City had enjoined the operation of public bathhouses as health hazards in order to stem the spread of the acquired immune deficiency syndrome (AIDS) virus. It does not appear the City directly enjoined the operation of this property. The record does not disclose if the prior owners closed the bathhouse as a direct result of the City’s campaign, or because of a decline in business as a result of the health emergency. Nevertheless, the undisputed evidence established the property had been vacant at least seven years by the time Stokes purchased it. He intended to renovate the building and reopen it as a bathhouse.

In 1985, the…

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.