|
3444 REVIEW DENIED Allegations that by deliberately keeping the anchor store in a shopping center vacant a supermarket chain was likely to cause blight by eliminating the economic viability of the shopping center, depressing land values, creating an attractive nuisance and visual decay, reducing consumer shopping choices, depriving the local municipality of sales tax revenues, strangling other small retail businesses in the same shopping center, and unfairly restraining competition were not sufficient to plead an action under the unfair competition law.CitationGREGORY v ALBERTSON'S (Unoccupied Supermarket) 104 CA4 845 [See: B&PC 17200 etseq; Barquis v Merchants 7 C3 94; CelTech v LA Cellular 20 C4 163, T/AT 5/99]
|
|
