This educational guide is based on the linked primary sources. It is not a Court publication, is not affiliated with the Court, and is not legal advice.
In brief
Overview
According to Chief Justice Rehnquist, the case San Remo Hotel, L.P. v. City and County of San Francisco was heard by the Supreme Court.
The dispute concerns a zoning determination in a historic district that the petitioners challenged through an administrative mandamus claim.
Background and question before the Court
Petitioners filed an administrative mandamus claim in the San Francisco Superior Court challenging a zoning determination in a historic district.
According to San Remo Hotel (Petitioner), the petitioner argues that issue preclusion does not apply, citing a prior England case where the Court required two separate litigations.
The city contends that a decision in its favor would result in ...
The Court found that the facts alleged did not give rise to a right to compensation under State law.
Justice O'Connor asked what precise claims the petitioner is raising.
Justice Kennedy asked whether the petitioner claims there is an exaction.
Justice Breyer asked how many issues the petitioner wants to raise.
Justice Stevens asked about the Pennsylvania analysis referenced by the petitioner.
Justice Souter asked for a simpler example to understand how the systems work together.
- [1] a6d7b95704aa42ab356b-r1-58da22971ee779f1.pdf, p. 42
- [2] a6d7b95704aa42ab356b-r1-58da22971ee779f1.pdf, p. 8
- [3] a6d7b95704aa42ab356b-r1-58da22971ee779f1.pdf, p. 19
- [4] a6d7b95704aa42ab356b-r1-58da22971ee779f1.pdf, p. 19
- [5] a6d7b95704aa42ab356b-r1-58da22971ee779f1.pdf, p. 3
- [6] a6d7b95704aa42ab356b-r1-58da22971ee779f1.pdf, p. 9
- [7] a6d7b95704aa42ab356b-r1-58da22971ee779f1.pdf, p. 18
- [8] a6d7b95704aa42ab356b-r1-58da22971ee779f1.pdf, p. 19
- [9] a6d7b95704aa42ab356b-r1-58da22971ee779f1.pdf, p. 38
What each side argues
Petitioner (San Remo Hotel, L.P.)
According to San Remo Hotel (Petitioner), the petitioner argues that issue preclusion does not apply, citing a prior England case where the Court required two separate litigations.
Respondent (City and County of San Francisco)
Source-limited. The record does not yet support a complete account.
The city contends that a decision in its favor would result in ...
What happened at oral argument
According to Chief Justice Rehnquist, chief Justice Rehnquist announced the start of argument.
Justice O'Connor asked what precise claims the petitioner is raising.
Justice Kennedy asked whether the petitioner claims there is an exaction.
Justice Breyer asked how many issues the petitioner wants to raise.
Justice Stevens asked about the Pennsylvania analysis referenced by the petitioner.
Justice Souter asked for a simpler example to understand how the systems work together.
- [1] a6d7b95704aa42ab356b-r1-58da22971ee779f1.pdf, p. 3
- [2] a6d7b95704aa42ab356b-r1-58da22971ee779f1.pdf, p. 3
- [3] a6d7b95704aa42ab356b-r1-58da22971ee779f1.pdf, p. 9
- [4] a6d7b95704aa42ab356b-r1-58da22971ee779f1.pdf, p. 18
- [5] a6d7b95704aa42ab356b-r1-58da22971ee779f1.pdf, p. 19
- [6] a6d7b95704aa42ab356b-r1-58da22971ee779f1.pdf, p. 38
What the Court decided
Why it matters
Terms to know
No glossary terms are available for this guide.
Primary sources
Read the source materials on the official site or open the immutable repository copy used for this guide.
- a6d7b95704aa42ab356b-r1-58da22971ee779f1.pdforal argument transcript
Guide generated September 21, 2026. Automated validation accepted this version.