Legal Opinion

Gilbert v. City of San Jose

California Court of Appeal

Decided December 18, 2003No. H025324PublishedCited by 13 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

PREMO, Acting P. J.

Plaintiffs, 1 employees of a 40-table gambling establishment known as Bay 101, sued defendant City of San Jose for declaratory relief. They sought a declaration that defendant’s Gaming Control Regulatory Ordinance, which required them to be licensed, was unconstitutional because it transgressed their right of privacy. They alternatively sought a declaration that the ordinance was unenforceable because state law preempted it. The parties filed motions for summary judgment. The trial court granted defendant’s motion and denied plaintiffs’ motion. On appeal, plaintiffs…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Hill v. National Collegiate Athletic Assn.California Supreme Court · 1994
  2. In Re LifschutzCalifornia Supreme Court · 1970
  3. Valley Bank of Nevada v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1975
  4. Great Lakes Properties, Inc. v. City of El SegundoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1977
  5. CBS, INC. v. BlockCalifornia Supreme Court · 1986

7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by13 opinions

  1. Versaci v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2005
  2. BRV, INC. v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2006
  3. Board of Pilot Commissioners v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2013
  4. Los Angeles Unified School District v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2014
  5. Vargas v. FMI, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 2015

8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API