Kaatz v. CITY OF SEASIDE
California Court of Appeal
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
DUFFY, J.
Code of Civil Procedure sections 860 through 870 (hereafter the validation statutes) 1 provide an expedited process by which certain public agency actions may be determined valid and not subject to attack. The public agency may validate its action by either active or passive means. It may initiate an action in rem to establish the validity of the matter. (§ 860.) Alternatively, the agency may do nothing, and if no “interested person” brings suit to determine the validity of the public agency’s action within 60 days (§ 863), the action is deemed valid. (§ 869.) But not all…
2Cases cited41 opinions
- Dyna-Med, Inc. v. Fair Employment & Housing CommissionCalifornia Supreme Court · 1987
- Lungren v. DeukmejianCalifornia Supreme Court · 1988
- Moyer v. Workmen's Compensation Appeals BoardCalifornia Supreme Court · 1973
- Norgart v. Upjohn Co.California Supreme Court · 1999
- Harris v. Capital Growth Investors XIVCalifornia Supreme Court · 1991
36 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by42 opinions
- Quantification Settlement Agreement CasesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2011
- McLeod v. Vista Unified School DistrictCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2008
- California Commerce Casino, Inc. v. SchwarzeneggerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2007
- Santa Clarita Organization for Planning & the Environment v. Castaic Lake Water AgencyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2016
- Santa Clarita Organization for Planning & the Environment v. AbercrombieCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2015
37 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.