Skip to main content
DRAFT FOR ATTORNEY REVIEW — NOT FINAL

Adamson Companies v. Zipp, 163 Cal. App. 3d 1 (1984)

Citation
Adamson Companies v. Zipp, 163 Cal. App. 3d 1 (1984)
Parent Document
Adamson Companies v. Zipp, 163 Cal. App. 3d 1 (1984)
Jurisdiction
California (state)
Effective Date
1984-11-15

Other Sections in This Document (89)

Full Text

762 chars
[23] Because of our conclusion that the Unruh Civil Rights Act does require invalidation of plaintiff's "adults only" restriction under the facts at bench, we need not address the constitutional issues raised by the parties. We note, nonetheless, that were we to uphold the age restriction under the Unruh Act we would yet be constrained to conclude that the restriction and the statutes purporting to authorize it violate the constitutional guarantee of equal protection of the laws (cf. In re Cox (1970) 3 Cal.3d 205, 216-217 fn. 11 [90 Cal. Rptr. 24, 474 P.2d 992]) as well as, in all probability, the California Constitution's right of privacy. (Cf. City of Santa Barbara v. Adamson (1980) 27 Cal.3d 123 [164 Cal. Rptr. 539, 610 P.2d 436, 12 A.L.R.4th 219].)