Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Albertson's, Inc. v. Young

California Court of Appeal

Decided March 18, 2003No. C037270Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in part

SIMS, J., Concurring and Dissenting.

—I concur with the majority’s affirmance of the judgment, but, with respect, I do not agree with the majority’s reasoning. I think the free speech guarantees of the California Constitution protect against infringement by private citizens. I also think there has never been a time when the initiative process was more deserving of encouragement. However, this judgment must be affirmed on a narrow ground: appellants failed to prove that this Albertson’s store had replaced the public downtowns of Nevada City and Grass Valley as a public forum. The trial court…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Nixon v. Shrink Missouri Government PACSupreme Court of the United States · 2000
  2. Robins v. Pruneyard Shopping CenterCalifornia Supreme Court · 1979
  3. Steven A. v. Rickie M.California Supreme Court · 1992
  4. Gerawan Farming, Inc. v. LyonsCalifornia Supreme Court · 2000
  5. Kennedy Wholesale, Inc. v. State Board of EqualizationCalifornia Supreme Court · 1991

5 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