This is the property of the Daily Journal Corporation and fully protected by copyright. It is made available only to Daily Journal subscribers for personal or collaborative purposes and may not be distributed, reproduced, modified, stored or transferred without written permission. Please click "Reprint" to order presentation-ready copies to distribute to clients or use in commercial marketing materials or for permission to post on a website. and copyright (showing year of publication) at the bottom.
Subscribe to the Daily Journal for access to Daily Appellate Reports, Verdicts, Judicial Profiles and more...

Zoning, Planning and Use

Sep. 21, 2002

Case Highlights Importance of Meeting Statutes of Limitations

Focus Column - By Daniel J. Curtin - In Travis v. Santa Cruz County, 100 Cal.App.4th 609 (2002), decided on July 25, the court held that a 90-day statute of limitations barred a challenge to a land use ordinance. This decision, like the California Supreme Court decision in Utility Cost Management v. Indian Wells Valley Water District, 26 Cal.4th 1185 (2001), upholding a 120-day statute of limitations to challenge a water fee, highlights the need to challenge land use regulations and decisions within a very short time frame.

        Focus Column
        
        By Daniel J. Curtin
        
        In Travis v. Santa Cruz County, 100 Cal.App.4th 609 (2002), decided on July 25, the court held that a 90-day statute of limitations barred a challenge to a land...

To continue reading, please subscribe.
For only $95 a month (the price of 2 article purchases)
Receive unlimited article access and full access to our archives,
Daily Appellate Report, award winning columns, and our
Verdicts and Settlements.
Or
$795 for an entire year!

Or access this article for $45
(Purchase provides 7-day access to this article. Printing, posting or downloading is not allowed.)

Already a subscriber?

Sign up for Daily Journal emails