Legal Opinion
Chan v. Judicial Council
California Court of Appeal
Decided September 15, 2011No. B224332PublishedCited by 2 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
FLIER, J.
Appellants are previously licensed court interpreters in Mandarin, Russian, or Armenian who failed to comply with new licensing requirements. Prior to 2009, interpreters in those languages became eligible to interpret by passing English language proficiency examinations. Respondent the Judicial Council of California, beginning in 2009, required that appellants and other interpreters in certain languages pass bilingual proficiency exams. At the same time, respondent granted automatic eligibility to interpreters who had helped develop the new exams. Appellants appeal from the…
2Cases cited29 opinions
- Board of Regents of State Colleges v. RothSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
- Perry v. SindermannSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
- Federal Communications Commission v. Beach Communications, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1993
- Reed v. ReedSupreme Court of the United States · 1971
- Nebbia v. New YorkSupreme Court of the United States · 1934
24 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Bottini v. City of San Diego, California Court of Appeal, 5th District2018
- Bottini v. City of San DiegoCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2018