Legal Opinion
Cedar Shake and Shingle Bureau Chemco, Inc. Wesco, Inc. v. City of Los Angeles
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided June 30, 1993No. 91-56527PublishedCited by 27 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
O’SCANNLAIN, Circuit Judge:
We are called upon to consider whether the federal courts should abstain from deciding a case which turns on a state law preemption question not yet resolved by California state courts, notwithstanding the existence of an Attorney General’s opinion directly on point.
I
This lawsuit is a challenge to a city ordinance banning the use of wood shake and shingle roofing materials in new construction in the City of Los Angeles (“the city”). Appellant Chemco, Inc. manufactures pressure impregnated fire retardant wood shakes and shingles, which are created by injecting at…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- Railroad Comm'n of Tex. v. Pullman Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1941
- England v. Louisiana State Board of Medical ExaminersSupreme Court of the United States · 1964
- County of Allegheny v. Frank Mashuda Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1959
- Harris County Commissioners Court v. MooreSupreme Court of the United States · 1975
- Cohen v. Board of SupervisorsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1985
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by27 opinions
- 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
- In Re Beacon Associates LitigationDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 2010
- George Young, Jr. v. State of HawaiiCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2021
- Jonathan R. v. Jim JusticeCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 2022
- Price v. AkakaCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1993
22 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.