Court Opinion

ID: 9943795
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2024-02-26 14:40:50.708953+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:45:12.062209
License: Public Domain

Because I am persuaded there was clearly state action here, I have concurred in the opinion prepared for the court by Justice McDaniel, but I concur separately also to say I think it is disgraceful the law permits a person to buy property with full knowledge of restrictions on its use and with full knowledge that others have purchased their homes relying on such restrictions and yet permits the purchaser to later repudiate and ignore such restrictions with impunity.
As to the City of Redlands, the lesson is clear. It must never again reduce its standards on account of the special configuration of a development or recorded restrictions on use pertaining to the number or ages of the prospective occupants.
Finally, while I am bound by the decisions of the California Supreme Court prohibiting age discrimination in housing, I find those decisions legally and practically inane. They invoke First Amendment guarantees, freedom of association, to strike down age limitations, failing to recognize that in so doing they infringe to the same extent the same constitutional right, the freedom of association, of the other owners, not to mention their reasonable expectations, property rights and their right freely to enter into binding *Page 101 
contracts. The rights overlooked are at least as significant and as sacrosanct as the rights of those for whom our high court in its paternalistic wisdom is so solicitous. *Page 102