§ 1805

Citation: § 1805
Parent Document: Action Apartment Ass'n v. Santa Monica Rent Control Board, 114 Cal. Rptr. 2d 412 (2002)
Jurisdiction: California (state)
Effective Date: 2002-01-03
Original Source: https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/2274225/action-apartment-assn-v-santa-m... ↗

Full Text

883 chars

8 Cal.4th 216, the court stated: “The crucial question under the takings clause is whether the rate set is just and reasonable. . . . If it is not just and reasonable, it is confiscatory. . . . If it is confiscatory, it is invalid. . . . ‘The economic judgments required in rate proceedings ... do not admit of a single correct result. . . . And, of course, courts are not equipped to carry out such a task.’ . . . ‘[S]o long as rates as a whole afford [the regulated firm] just compensation for [its] over-all services to the public,’ they are not confiscatory. . . . That a particular rate may not cover the cost of a particular good or service does not work confiscation in and of itself. ... In other words, confiscation is judged with an eye toward the regulated firm as an enterprise.” (Id. at pp. 292-293, citations omitted.) The concern expressed in 20th Century Ins., supra,

Other Sections in This Document (232)

Full Text