City of Sacramento v. Superior Court
California Court of Appeal
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
EVANS, J.
In Leslie v. Roe (1974) 41 Cal.App.3d 104 [116 Cal.Rptr. 386] (hg. den.), the court held that indigency does not entitle a party in a civil action to a transcript prepared at public expense to assist in the *717appeal of an adverse decision. That principle was followed in Civil Service Commission v. Superior Court (Price) (1976) 63 Cal.App.3d 627 [133 Cal.Rptr. 825] (hg. den.) where the court, faced with a factual context identical to the instant proceeding, held that a court reviewing an administrative decision “is without power to order that an indigent person seeking judicial…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Leslie v. RoeCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1974
- Civil Service Commission v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1976
- Woodard v. Personnel Commission of the Compton Unified School DistrictCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1979
3Cited by4 opinions
- Hittle v. Santa Barbara County Employees Retirement Ass'nCalifornia Supreme Court · 1985
- Austin v. ValverdeCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2012
- City of Sacramento v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1980
- Hittle v. Santa Barbara County Employees Retirement Ass'nCalifornia Supreme Court · 1985