Beck

Beck v. City of Upland

Good Law
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMay 28, 200805-56901California9,905 words

Opinion

Opinion

I. Background

A. The Rubble Removal Contract and the Zoning Investigation

Early in 2003, Beck heard about a business opportunity from city officials: Upland was planning construction work in town, and there would be a significant amount of rubble to remove and recycle.1 Beck thought his business, Dineen 1 Because we are reviewing a grant of summary judgment against Beck, we relate the facts in the light most favorable to him, the nonmoving party. Blankenhorn v. City of Orange, 485 F.3d 463, 470 (9th Cir. 2007). The defendants dispute many of these facts in opposing declarations and depo- sitions. 6042 BECK v. CITY OF UPLAND Trucking, was a good fit for the job: It had been operating in town since 1958 and often did rubble removal and recycling work. Beck believed the rubble had significant resale value and would have been willing to remove it for free in exchange for the right to resell it. So Beck was surprised when, on Sep- tember 8, 2003, the City Council awarded a $350,000 no-bid contract, without public notice or comment, to an out-of-town competitor, Intravaia Rock & Sand. Because the city normally put all projects over $5,000 out to bid, Beck suspected…

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.