Concerned Dog Owners v. City of Los Angeles

Good Law
123 Cal. Rptr. 3d 774·194 Cal. App. 4th 1219·2011 Cal. App. LEXIS 511
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaApril 29, 2011No. B218003California6,246 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Johnson, J.

In 2008, the City of Los Angeles (City) passed an ordinance amending section 53.15.2 of the Los Angeles Municipal Code (Ordinance) to require all dogs and cats within the City to be spayed or neutered unless one of the listed exemptions is met. The City adopted the Ordinance with the intent of controlling the rising pet population in the City.

Plaintiffs Concerned Dog Owners of California, Cathie Turner, Dana Bleifer, DVM, and Vardui Khorikyan (collectively CDOC) filed a motion for declaratory and injunctive relief against the City seeking to invalidate the Ordinance, contending that the Ordinance violates various aspects of the state and federal Constitutions. The trial court denied relief, finding that the Ordinance was a valid exercise of the City’s police power and that no constitutional rights were implicated by its provisions.

*1225 We hold the Ordinance constitutes a valid exercise of the City’s police power and find no constitutional infirmity with any of its provisions. Accordingly, we affirm.

FACTUAL BACKGROUND AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY

In February 2008, the Los Angeles City Council amended section 53.15.2 of the Los Angeles Municipal Code. 1 The amended…

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.