Elizabeth Blodgett and Richard Tarmey v. County of Santa Cruz, Pat Liberty, Dan Forbus, Chris Matthews, and Gary Patton

Good Law
698 F.2d 368·1982 U.S. App. LEXIS 16356
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitAugust 25, 198281-4546California669 words

Opinion

Opinion

Appellants are property owners of adjoining parcels in a rural area of Santa Cruz, California. They have brought suit under 42 U.S.C. §§ 1983 , 1985 and 1986 against appellees, the County of Santa Cruz and four members of its board of supervisors. They allege that appellees engaged in a series of knowing and intentional acts designed to deprive appellants of due process and equal protection of the laws in connection with appellees’ rejection of appellants’ requests for rezoning and minor land divisions. The district court, 553 F.Supp. 1090 , granted summary judgment in favor of appellees and this appeal was taken. We agree that no material issue of fact is presented and accordingly affirm.

Appellants’ assignments of error and contentions on appeal were all argued to the district court and are meticulously dealt with by the district court in a memorandum opinion. Upon all issues here presented, we agree with the district court for the reasons set forth in the memorandum opinion.

1. Appellants presented no material issue of fact challenging the overwhelming evidence that appellees acted in a fair, open, evenhanded manner in the processing and denial of appellants’ applications. As…

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.