Legal Opinion

Chrysler Corp. v. New Motor Vehicle Board

California Court of Appeal

Decided January 15, 1993No. D016270PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

TODD, J.

On this appeal from a judgment granting a petition of Chrysler Corporation (Chrysler) for a peremptory writ of mandate under Code of Civil Procedure section 1094.5, we are presented with a question of statutory construction concerning the directory or mandatory effect, and the meaning of, the Vehicle Code 1 section 3067 phrase: “If the board fails to act within 30 days after such hearing, within 30 days after the board receives a proposed decision where the case is heard before a hearing officer alone, or within such period as may be necessitated by Section 11517 of the…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Morris v. County of MarinCalifornia Supreme Court · 1977
  2. Edwards v. SteeleCalifornia Supreme Court · 1979
  3. Garrison v. RourkeCalifornia Supreme Court · 1948
  4. Pulcifer v. County of AlamedaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1946
  5. Keane v. SmithCalifornia Supreme Court · 1971

5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Anserv Insurance Services, Inc. v. KelsoCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2000
  2. Mark G. v. John G.California Court of Appeal · 2011
  3. Anserv Insurance Services, Inc. v. KelsoCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2000
  4. California Correctional Peace Officers Ass'n. v. State Personnel BoardCalifornia Supreme Court · 1995
  5. Lopez v. Booz Allen Hamilton, Inc.District Court, E.D. California · 2020

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API