Templo v. State
California Court of Appeal, 5th District
1Opinion of the Court
McGuiness, Acting P.J.*
*733Appellants Geraldine and Mark Templo (the Templos) brought an action for declaratory relief against respondent State of California (State), claiming that a statute requiring litigants to pay a nonrefundable fee in order to secure a jury trial is unconstitutional. The trial court granted the State's motion for judgment on the pleadings on the ground that the State is not a proper defendant to the cause of action. The Templos appeal, and contend the State is the proper defendant. We reject the contention and affirm the judgment.
FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
On July 29,…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Badie v. Bank of AmericaCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1998
- Serrano v. PriestCalifornia Supreme Court · 1976
- State of California v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1974
- People Ex Rel. Harris v. Pac Anchor Transportation, Inc.California Supreme Court · 2014
- Sinclair Paint Co. v. State Board of EqualizationCalifornia Supreme Court · 1997
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Alameda County Waste Mgmt Authority v. Waste Connections US, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 2021
- Alameda County Waste Mgmt. Authority v. Waste Connections etc.California Court of Appeal · 2021
- Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Assn. v. Bay Area Toll AuthorityCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2020