Legal Opinion
Otto v. Los Angeles Unified School District
California Court of Appeal
Decided February 14, 2003No. B156010PublishedCited by 12 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
CROSKEY, J.
Petitioner Kevin Otto (Otto) appeals from a postjudgment order denying his Code of Civil Procedure section 1021.5 motion for attorney’s fees. Otto is a public safety officer employed by the Los Angeles Unified School District (the District). This is the second time we have considered his case.
By published opinion, we reversed a judgment entered against Otto on his Code of Civil Procedure section 1085 petition for a writ. By such petition, Otto sought to have the trial court direct the District to afford him an administrative appeal on what he argued was punitive action taken…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Woodland Hills Residents Ass'n v. City Council of Los AngelesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1979
- Baggett v. GatesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1982
- Press v. Lucky Stores, Inc.California Supreme Court · 1983
- Los Angeles Police Protective League v. City of Los AngelesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1986
- County of Inyo v. City of Los AngelesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1978
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by12 opinions
- Lyons v. Chinese Hospital Ass'nCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2006
- Robinson v. City of ChowchillaCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2011
- Concerned Citizens of La Habra v. City of La HabraCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2005
- California Redevelopment Ass'n v. MatosantosCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2013
- MBNA America Bank, N.A. v. GormanAppellate Division of the Superior Court of California · 2006
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.