Legal Opinion
Yes On 25, Citizens for an On-Time Budget v. Superior Court
California Court of Appeal
Decided August 9, 2010No. C065707; No. C065708PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
SCOTLAND, P. J.
The Attorney General of the State of California, and Yes on 25, Citizens for an On-Time Budget, seek a peremptory writ of mandate directing respondent superior court to vacate its judgment entered on August 5, 2010, insofar as it compels revision of the ballot title and summary and the ballot label for Proposition 25 prepared by the Attorney General.1
Respondent court mled these ballot materials are misleading because the language, “RETAINS TWO-THIRDS VOTE REQUIREMENT FOR TAXES,” suggests that passage of Proposition 25 is necessary to continue the current constitutional…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Palma v. U.S. Industrial Fasteners, Inc.California Supreme Court · 1984
- Amador Valley Joint Union High School District v. State Board of EqualizationCalifornia Supreme Court · 1978
- Arias v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 2009
- Professional Engineers in California Government v. KemptonCalifornia Supreme Court · 2007
- People Ex Rel. San Francisco Bay Conservation & Development Commission v. Town of EmeryvilleCalifornia Supreme Court · 1968
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- McDonough v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2012
- Becerra v. Superior Court of Sacramento Cnty., California Court of Appeal, 5th District2017
- Becerra v. Super. Ct.California Court of Appeal · 2018
- Bonta v. Super. Ct.California Court of Appeal · 2024
- Braziel v. Super. Ct.California Court of Appeal · 2014