Legal Opinion

Hardman v. Feinstein

California Court of Appeal

Decided September 30, 1987No. A031244PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

SCOTT, J.

This appeal follows the trial court's order sustaining a demurrer to appellants’ first amended complaint (complaint) without leave to amend on the ground that appellants do not have standing to bring the action. We affirm. A resident and taxpayer of a city who has no special interest in a charitable trust does not have standing to bring an action seeking to enjoin mismanagement of the trust, even though the trust is administered pursuant to a city charter and the trustees are city officials.

I

Procedural Background

The complaint alleges the following. Appellants, Paul D. Hardman,…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Blair v. PitchessCalifornia Supreme Court · 1971
  2. National Audubon Society v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1983
  3. People ex rel. Ellert v. CogswellCalifornia Supreme Court · 1896
  4. Beazell v. SchraderCalifornia Supreme Court · 1963
  5. Holt v. College of Osteopathic Physicians & SurgeonsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1964

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

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Gould v. Maryland Sound Industries, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 1995
  2. L.B. Research & Education Foundation v. UCLA FoundationCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2005
  3. Patton v. SherwoodCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2007
  4. City of Palm Springs v. Living Desert ReserveCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1999
  5. Autonomous Region of Narcotics Anon v. Narcotics Anon World SvcsCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2022

2 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