Legal Opinion
Sherwin-Williams Co. v. City of Los Angeles
California Supreme Court
Decided February 4, 1993No. S026785PublishedCited by 151 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
MOSK, J.
We granted review in this matter to determine whether Penal Code section 594.1 (sometimes hereafter the statute), which mainly defines the lawful transfer and possession of aerosol paint and also requires retailers to post a warning against vandalism, preempts Los Angeles Municipal Code section 47.11 (sometimes hereafter the ordinance), which regulates the retail *896display of aerosol paint and broad-tipped marker pens. As we shall explain, we conclude that it does not.
I
Plaintiffs, the Sherwin-Williams Company—which manufactures, distributes, and retails aerosol paint—and…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- People v. OverstreetCalifornia Supreme Court · 1986
- Bishop v. City of San JoseCalifornia Supreme Court · 1969
- Ex Parte DanielsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1920
- In Re HubbardCalifornia Supreme Court · 1964
- Cohen v. Board of SupervisorsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1985
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by151 opinions
- Morehart v. County of Santa BarbaraCalifornia Supreme Court · 1994
- Stop Youth Addiction, Inc. v. Lucky Stores, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 1998
- Santa Monica Food Not Bombs v. City of Santa MonicaCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2006
- Action Apartment Ass'n v. City of Santa MonicaCalifornia Supreme Court · 2007
- Fireman's Fund Insurance Company, a California Corporation v. City of Lodi, California, Jack Sieglock, in His Capacity as Mayor of the City of Lodi Richard Prima, Jr., in His Capacity as Enforcing Officer of Lodi Ordinance No. 1650 Randall A. Hays, Individually and in His Capacity as Lodi City Attorney Michael C. Donovan, Individually and in His Capacity as Lodi Assistant City Attorney Adam L. Babich, Individually and in His Capacity as Lodi Assistant City Attorney Steven H. Doto, Individually and in His Capacity as Lodi Assistant City Attorney Bret A. Stone, Individually and in His Capacity as Lodi Assistant City Attorney John R. Till, Individually and in His Capacity as Lodi Assistant City Attorney Zevnik, Horton, Guibord and McGovern Llp, Individually and in Their Capacity as Lodi Assistant City Attorneys Fran E. Forkas, in His Capacity as Enforcing Officer of Lodi Ordinance No. 1650, Unigard Insurance Company, a Washington Corporation Unigard Security Insurance Company, a Washington Corporation v. City of LodiCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2002
146 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.