Neat Auto Detail & Supply v. City of Maywood CA2/2
Filed 5/5/15 Neat Auto Detail & Supply v. City of Maywood CA2/2 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT
DIVISION TWO
NEAT AUTO DETAIL & SUPPLY, INC. B258375 et al., (Los Angeles County Plaintiffs and Appellants, Super. Ct. No. VC063380)
v.
CITY OF MAYWOOD,
Defendant and Respondent.
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County. Roger Ito, Judge. Affirmed.
Law Offices of Michael B. Montgomery and Michael B. Montgomery for Plaintiffs and Appellants.
Jones & Mayer, James R. Touchstone and Elena Q. Gerli for Defendant and Respondent.
____________________
Neat Auto Detail & Supply, Inc. (Neat Auto) and Xpress Fleet Wash, LLC (Xpress Fleet) (collectively the Neat Auto Parties) appeal the judgment in favor of respondent City of Maywood (City) following its successful motion for judgment on the pleadings. According to the Neat Auto Parties, the trial court improperly ruled: (1) the Maywood Zoning Ordinance (MZO) prohibits the washing of truck tractors at a car wash operated by Xpress Fleet on Neat Auto’s land; and (2) the Neat Auto Parties are not entitled to injunctive relief. We find no error and affirm. FACTS The Operative Pleading The operative pleading, the First Amended Complaint (FAC), alleged: Neat Auto owns commercially zoned property (property) in the city and leases the property to Xpress Fleet, which uses it as a car wash. Since 2006, Xpress Fleet has washed truck tractors.1 On August 18, 2009, the City’s Planning Commission passed Resolution No. PC- 554, which granted the Neat Auto Parties a conditional use permit (CUP) to “expand an existing auto detail [facility].” The CUP impliedly permits the washing of truck tractors. Moreover, the building plans for the expansion show a heightened clearance for truck tractors in the wash bays. Thus, the washing of truck tractors is permitted. Nonetheless, the City advised Neat Auto that no truck wash or truck related business would be permitted on the property. In addition, Neat Auto was directed to remove any truck wash related signs, banners, etc. or risk having the CUP revoked.
More from California Court of Appeal
- People v. Hill (1998)
- In Re Autumn H. (1994)
- Nwosu v. Uba (2004)
- In Re Casey D. (1999)
- Santisas v. Goodin (1998)
- Cahill v. San Diego Gas & Electric Co. (2011)
- People v. Rivera (2015)
- People v. Barnett (1998)
- People v. Serrano (2012)
- Benach v. County of Los Angeles (2007)