99 Cents Only Stores v. Lancaster Redevelopment Agency

Good Law
237 F. Supp. 2d 1123·2001 WL 811056·2001 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 9894
United States District Court, Central District of CaliforniaJune 26, 2001CV 00-07572SVW(AJWx)California3,849 words

Opinion

Opinion

Wilson, J.

ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND DENYING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

TO THE PARTIES AND THEIR ATTORNEYS OF RECORD:

I. INTRODUCTION

Plaintiff 99 Cents Only Stores (“99 Cents”) alleges that Defendants Lancaster Redevelopment Agency and the City of Lancaster (collectively “Lancaster”) have threatened to take its property in violation of the Fifth Amendment and, accordingly, seek equitable relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 . In particular, 99 Cents asks the Court to enjoin Lancaster from initiating condemnation proceedings against it on the ground that any such condemnation would violate the “public use” provision of the Takings Clause contained in the Fifth Amendment. For the reasons set forth below, the Court grants 99 Cents’ motion for summary judgment and, accordingly, issues an injunction as described herein.

II. FACTUAL SUMMARY

A. The Development of the Power Center

In 1983, pursuant to California’s Community Redevelopment Law (the “CRL”), Lancaster enacted an ordinance establishing the Amargosa Redevelopment Project Area (the “Project Area”) and adopted a Redevelopment Plan (the “Amargosa Plan” or the “Plan”) for the revitalization 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.