Guggenheim v. City of Goleta
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
638 F.3d 1111 (2010)

- Written by Darius Dehghan, JD
Facts
In 1979, the County of Santa Barbara enacted a rent-control ordinance for mobile home parks. The ordinance set the permissible levels for rent increases in mobile home parks. In 1997, Daniel and Susan Guggenheim (plaintiffs) bought a mobile home park in unincorporated Santa Barbara County. The Guggenheims’ mobile home park was subject to the county ordinance. Hence, the Guggenheims paid a reduced price for the mobile home park because there was no expectation of maximizing their investment by charging high rents. In 2002, the newly incorporated City of Goleta (city) (defendant), which included the Guggenheims’ mobile home park, enacted an ordinance that was identical to the county ordinance. Subsequently, the Guggenheims brought suit against the city. The Guggenheims contended that the city ordinance constituted a regulatory taking, thereby entitling them to just compensation. The district court granted summary judgment in favor of the city. The court of appeals reversed. Later, the court of appeals decided to rehear the case en banc.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Kleinfeld, J.)
Dissent (Bea, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,500 briefs, keyed to 994 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.