Cedar Shake and Shingle Bureau Chemco, Inc. Wesco, Inc. v. City of Los Angeles

Good Law
93 Daily Journal DAR 8418·997 F.2d 620·1993 WL 229987·1993 U.S. App. LEXIS 15899·93 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 4964
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJune 30, 199391-56527California3,365 words

Opinion

Opinion

O'Scannlain, J.

We are called upon to consider whether the federal courts should abstain from deciding a case which turns on a state law preemption question not yet resolved by California state courts, notwithstanding the existence of an Attorney General’s opinion directly on point.

I

This lawsuit is a challenge to a city ordinance banning the use of wood shake and shingle roofing materials in new construction in the City of Los Angeles (“the city”). Appellant Chemco, Inc. manufactures pressure impregnated fire retardant wood shakes and shingles, which are created by injecting at high pressure a fire retardant chemical into ordinary wood shakes. While untreated wood shakes are highly inflammable, pressure impregnated shakes are, to a certain degree, fire retardant. Appellant Wesco, Inc. is a distributor of the treated shakes; appellant Cedar Shake and Shingle Bureau is a trade association representing the interests of the wood shake and shingle industry. We will refer to the appellants collectively as “Cedar Shake.”

Los Angeles Municipal Code (“LAMC”) § 91.3203(b) requires roof coverings on all new construction within the city to be fire retardant. The term “fire retardant roof’ is defined in…

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.