Legal Opinion
Norasingh v. Lightbourne
California Court of Appeal
Decided September 9, 2014No. A137967PublishedCited by 12 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
REARDON, J.
Amanda Norasingh—a young adult suffering from significant medical and mental disabilities—appeals from the trial court’s denial of her petition for writ of administrative mandamus. Through these writ proceedings, Norasingh seeks reinstatement of protective supervision benefits under the In-Home Supportive Services (IHSS) Program administered by the California State Department of Social Services (CDSS). After a hearing, an administrative law judge (ALJ) concluded that Norasingh was no longer eligible for the protective supervision benefits that she had been receiving since…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Frink v. ProdCalifornia Supreme Court · 1982
- Breslin v. City and County of San FranciscoCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2007
- Miller v. WoodsCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1983
- LaGrone v. City of OaklandCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2011
- Marshall v. McMahonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1993
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by12 opinions
- Robles v. Employment Development DepartmentCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2015
- Young v. Cal. Fish & Game Comm'n, California Court of Appeal, 5th District2018
- Reilly v. Marin Hous. Auth., California Court of Appeal, 5th District2018
- L.B. v. Superior Court CA1/4California Court of Appeal · 2021
- Marriage of Linett CA4/1California Court of Appeal · 2021
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.