The Ohio House, LLC v. City of Costa Mesa, 135 F.4th 645 (2024)

Citation: The Ohio House, LLC v. City of Costa Mesa, 135 F.4th 645 (2024)
Parent Document: The Ohio House, LLC v. City of Costa Mesa, 135 F.4th 645 (2024)
Jurisdiction: United States (federal)
Effective Date: 2024-12-04
Original Source: https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/10287865/the-ohio-house-llc-v-city-of-c... ↗

Full Text

1,051 chars

Unified Sch. Dist. v. Yee, 241 Cal. Rptr. 3d 896, 906 (Cal.
Ct. App. 2018) (explaining that plaintiffs were “in substance
and effect” challenging “the constitutionality of the . . .
statutes themselves” by challenging actions that were
“compelled by and taken under the . . . statutes”). Ordinance
17-06, adopted on May 2, 2017, is the most recent law that
Ohio House challenges. Because Ohio House filed its initial
complaint on September 6, 2019, well after the applicable
90-day statute of limitations period set forth in § 65009, it is
time-barred from asserting its § 65008(a) claim.
                     III.     CONCLUSION
    For the foregoing reasons, we affirm the district court’s
grant of summary judgment in favor of the City on Ohio
House’s disparate-impact claim and its denial of judgment
as a matter of law on all other claims. 17 To the extent there
were errors in the district court’s submission of claims to the
jury and in its jury instructions, we conclude that they were
harmless and do not warrant a new trial.
       AFFIRMED.

Other Sections in This Document (107)

Full Text