Macri

Macri v. King County

Good Law
126 F.3d 1125·97 Daily Journal DAR 11978·1997 WL 634021·1997 U.S. App. LEXIS 24969·97 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 7414
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitApril 21, 1997No. 95-35709California2,760 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Browning, J.

I

Appellants’ preliminary plat application was denied by Appellee (“the County”). A *1127 Washington state superior court ruled that the denial was wrongful and a preliminary application was granted. Appellants then filed this action in state court, alleging civil rights violations under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 , a federal takings violation, and various state law violations. The County removed the action to federal court. The district court dismissed all federal claims and two of the state claims, and remanded the state inverse condemnation claim to state court. Appellants appeal the judgment dismissing the claims. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm.

II

In March 1990, Appellants filed an application with King County to subdivide their 3.1 acre property located on a dead end road in King County into 11 lots. After two hearings, the Hearing Examiner recommended that the application be denied because of inadequate access. The Hearing Examiner considered basing the decision on an informal “rule of thumb” often followed by the County that generally limited the number of lots which could be developed in an area with only one access road (the “100-lot” limit).…

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.