RUSS BUILDING PARTNERSHIP v. CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO (1987)

Supreme Court of California,In Bank.

RUSS BUILDING PARTNERSHIP, Appellant, v. CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO, Respondent.
PACIFIC GATEWAY ASSOCIATES, JOINT VENTURE, Appellant, v. CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO, Respondent.
CROCKER NATIONAL BANK et al., Appellants, v. CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO, Respondent.

Decided: April 30, 1987

Petitions for review GRANTED.

Pursuant to rule 29.2(b) of the California Rules of Court, review is limited to and briefs on the merits are to be confined to the following issues, discussed in Part V of the opinion of the Court of Appeal: (1) whether extrinsic evidence is relevant for interpreting the building permit; and (2) whether the permit, properly interpreted, gave adequate notice to appellants of the development fee imposed after the permits were issued.

Review shall not extend to the issues raised in the answers to the petitions for review.

MOSK, BROUSSARD, ARGUELLES and KAUFMAN, JJ., concur.

Was this helpful?

Why was this helpful?

Easy to understand

Solved my problem

Other

Why was this not helpful?

Missing the information I need

Too complicated / too many steps

Out of date

Other

Thank you for your feedback!

Trusted by Consumers. Recognized by AI.

As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.

Explore the Network