Legal Opinion
City of Anaheim v. State of California
California Court of Appeal
Decided March 5, 1987No. B017415PublishedCited by 4 opinions
[Opinion certified for partial publication.*]
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
DEVICH, J.—
The City of Anaheim (hereafter City) sought reimbursement for costs it allegedly incurred as a result of the enactment of Assembly Bill No. 2674 (Stats. 1980), chapter 1244, page 4220 (hereafter 1244/80). The State Board of Control (hereafter Board) denied City’s claim. City thereafter filed a petition in the superior court seeking a writ of mandate and declaratory relief. City now appeals from the judgment denying its petition. We affirm.
Procedural History
On October 19, 1981, City filed a “test claim” (former Rev. & Tax. Code, § 2218, subd. (a)) seeking reimbursement of the…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Valdes v. CoryCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1983
- County of Los Angeles v. State of CaliforniaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1987
- City of Sacramento v. State of CaliforniaCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1984
- City of Seattle v. StateWashington Supreme Court · 1983
3Cited by4 opinions
- Lucia Mar Unified School District v. HonigCalifornia Supreme Court · 1988
- San Diego Unified School District v. Commision on State MandatesCalifornia Supreme Court · 2004
- City of Richmond v. Commission on State MandatesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1998
- City of Richmond v. Commission on State MandatesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1998