United States Ninth Circuit

In an action claiming that Santa Monica's rent control ordinance is unconstitutional under the "public use" component of the Fifth Amendment's Takings Clause and the substantive component of the Fourteenth Amendment's Due Process Clause, dismissal of the complaint is affirmed where: 1) the Fifth Amendment claims were not viable; 2) the facial Fourteenth Amendment claim was time-barred, and 3) the as-applied Fourteenth Amendment claim was unripe.

Appellate Information

• Argued 06/18/2007
• Decided 12/03/2007
• Published 12/03/2007

Judges

• THOMAS, Circuit Judge:, Before:  SIDNEY R. THOMAS, RAYMOND C. FISHER, and RONALD M. GOULD, Circuit Judges.

Court

• United States Ninth Circuit

Counsel

• For Appellant:
  
• Robert J. Franklin (argued) and Rosario Perry, Santa Monica, CA, attorneys for Plaintiffs-Appellants Action Apartment Association, Inc., and Mathew Millen.


• For Appellees:
  
• David Pettit and Michael Roth (argued), Los Angeles, CA;  and David Daniels and Michaelyn Jones, Santa Monica, CA, attorneys for Defendants-Appellees, Santa Monica Rent Control Board and Mary Ann Yurkonis.