From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Community Redevelopment Agency v. E. P. A.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
Nov 13, 1975
525 F.2d 1366 (9th Cir. 1975)

Opinion

No. 73-3279.

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

November 13, 1975.

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.

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.

On Petition to Review Actions of the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency.

Before WRIGHT, KILKENNY and SNEED, Circuit Judges.



ORDER OF DISMISSAL


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.

Dismissed.


Summaries of

Community Redevelopment Agency v. E. P. A.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
Nov 13, 1975
525 F.2d 1366 (9th Cir. 1975)
Case details for

Community Redevelopment Agency v. E. P. A.

Case Details

Full title:COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF HAWTHORNE, ETC., ET AL.…

Court:United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit

Date published: Nov 13, 1975

Citations

525 F.2d 1366 (9th Cir. 1975)

Citing Cases

City of Santa Rosa v. United States Environmental Protection Agency

Subsequently, each petitioner was asked to inform the court what issues, if any, it still desired the court…