TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Community Redevelopment Agency of the City of Hawthorne, Etc. v. Environmental Protection Agency

Cmty. Redevelopment Agency of the City of Hawthorne, Etc. v. Env't Prot. Agency, 525 F.2d 1366 (9th Cir. 1975)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · U.S. Courts of Appeals
Decided
November 13, 1975
Docket
No. 73--3279
Citations
525 F.2d 1366

Opinion

525 F.2d 1366

COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF the CITY OF HAWTHORNE, etc., et al., Petitioners, v. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY et al., Respondents.

No. 73--3279. *

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Nov. 13, 1975.

Barry Wolf, San Jose, Cal. (argued), for City of Santa Rosa and others.

Henry C. Thumann, Los Angeles, Cal. (argued), for Ernest W. Hahn, Inc., and others.

David Toomey, New York City, N.Y. (argued), for J. C. Penney Co., Inc., and others.

Joel Moskowitz, Los Angeles, Cal., and Mark I. Weinberger, Sacramento, Cal. (argued), for Trustees of the Cal. State Universities and Colleges, and others.

John H. Findley, Sacramento, Cal. (argued), for Pacific Legal Foundation.

Neil T. Proto, Washington, D.C., and John J. Graves, Jr., Las Vegas, Nev. (argued), for the Environmental Protection Agency.

ORDER OF DISMISSAL

Before WRIGHT, KILKENNY and SNEED, Circuit Judges.

1

No Petitioner, pursuant to our Order of August 15, 1975, informed this Court within 21 days thereafter of issues other than those dealt with by our August 15, 1975 Order which it wished this Court to review. Under these circumstances, it is proper for this Court to dismiss finally these petitions for review. It is so ordered.

2

Dismissed.

* Consolidated with cases in which the following were Petitioners and the Environmental Protection Agency et al., were Respondents:

Redevelopment Agency of City of Long Beach, 73--3288; Pasadena Redevelopment Agency, 73--3289; Redevelopment Agency of City of Bakersfield, 73--3290; Redevelopment Agency of City of Inglewood, 73--3291; Temple City Redevelopment Agency, 73--3292; Alhambra Redevelopment Agency, 73--3293; Redevelopment Agency of City of Glendale, 73--3294; Culver City Redevelopment Agency, 73--3295; Redevelopment Agency of City of San Fernando, 73--3299; Redevelopment Agency of City of Anaheim, 73--3300; City of Downey, 73--3322; Codding Enterprises, 73--3377; Olson, 73--3379; Chamber of Commerce of City of Sunnyvale, 73--3387; Bank of America National Trust & Savings Ass'n, 73--3423; Home Savings & Loan Ass'n, 73--3431; Community Redevelopment Agency of City of Los Angeles, 73--3468; City of Compton, 73--3469; City of South Gate, 73--3477; City of San Buenaventura, 73--3478; City of Concord, 73--3303; National Ass'n of Industrial Parks, 73-3366; Farasyn, 73--3381; El Camino Hospital Dist., 73--3389; Dickman, 73--3390; City of Los Altos, 73--3391; Homart Development Co., 73--3398; Leonard Lucio, 73-3401; Coast Community College Dist., 73--3411; Allright California, Inc., 73--3419; City of Selma, 73--3421; Saint Mary's College of California, 73--3460; Bohannon Development Co., 73--3481; First Congregational Church of Los Angeles, 73--3485; Mancuso (Peter J.), 73--3511; Litronix, Inc., 73--3526; American Micro-Systems, Inc., 73--3527; Wheatley-Jacobsen, Inc., 73--3528; One Twenty El Camino Co., 73--3371; La Mesa Community Redevelopment Agency, 73--3451; Stanford Financial Square, 73--3472; Varian Associates, 73--3505; Hinds (Thomas F.), 73--3514; Corporation of Presiding Bishop of Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, 73--3525; National City, 73--3530; M & T, Inc., 73--3286; Chevron Land and Development Co., 73--3474; Grossmont Shopping Center Co., 73--3524; Texaco, Inc., 73--3406; Bank of California, National Ass'n, 73--3473; Association of California Hosp. Dists., Inc., 73-3388; and County of Contra Costa, 73--3470.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

1976: 119762026peak 1976 · 1

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. City of Santa Rosa v. United States Environmental Protection Agency534 F.2d 150 (9th Cir. 1976)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 0

No citations to other opinions in this database were found.

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list