Kay

Kay v. Placer County

Good Law
219 F. App'x 679
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJanuary 23, 2007No. 05-15191California1,081 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Plaintiff-Appellants Philip and Robin Kay (“the Kays”) appeal the district court’s decision to dismiss their suit for failure to state a claim. The Kays allege that Placer County and related parties (“the County”), together with Roy and Gayle Kirkorian (“the Kirkorians”), violated their rights to due process and equal protection by subdividing the Kirkorians’ property under the guise of a Minor Boundary Line Adjustment (“MBLA”). After reviewing the district court’s deci-

sion de novo, accepting all facts alleged in the complaint as true and construing them in the light most favorable to the nonmov-ing party, see, e.g., Knievel v. ESPN, 393 F.3d 1068, 1072 (9th Cir.2005), we affirm.

The district court held that the Kays did not have standing to challenge the County’s first boundary line adjustment. We conclude that the Kays have satisfied the requirements of Article III standing. See Friends of the Earth, Inc. v. Laidlaw Envtl. Servs. (TOC), Inc., 528 U.S. 167, 180-81 , 120 S.Ct. 693 , 145 L.Ed.2d 610 (2000). However, we agree with the district court that the Kays’ procedural due process claim with respect to the first MBLA nevertheless fails as a matter of…

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.