Carson Harbor Village Ltd., a California Limited Partnership, Dba Carson Harbor Village Mobile Home Park v. City of Carson, a Municipal Corporation

Caution

37 F.3d 468·94 Daily Journal DAR 13751·1994 U.S. App. LEXIS 27355·94 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 7467

United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitSeptember 30, 199493-55234California4,853 words

Opinion

Beezer, J.

Carson Harbor Village Ltd. appeals the dismissal of its complaint alleging that laws regulating mobile home parks in the City of Carson, California violate the Due Process and Takings Clauses of the United States Constitution. We affirm.

I

Carson Harbor Village Ltd. (“Carson Harbor”) owns a mobile home park containing 409 rental spaces in the City of Carson (“city”). Residents of the park own their mobile homes but rent spaces from Carson Harbor. Despite their name, mobile homes are largely immobile. As a practical matter, moving one is expensive and difficult. Once in place, the vast majority of mobile homes are never moved again. If a mobile home owner desires to relocate, he usually sells the mobile home in place and the purchaser rents the space from the park owner.

Since 1978, mobile home park owners in California have been subject to the Mobile Home Residency Law, Cal.Civ.Code § 798 et seq. (“Residency Law”). The Residency Law severely limits the bases upon which a park owner may terminate a mobile home owner’s tenancy. It also prohibits park owners from requiring the removal of a mobile home when it is sold. Park owners cannot charge a transfer fee upon sale, nor can…

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.