Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

United Farm Workers of America v. Superior Court

California Supreme Court

Decided July 28, 1975No. S.F. 23223Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in part

CLARK, J., Concurring and Dissenting.

I concur that due process does not compel notice in every proceeding under Code of Civil Procedure section 527. (See Chrysler Credit Corp. v. Waegele (1972) 29 Cal.App.3d 681 [105 Cal.Rptr. 914].) I further concur with the majority’s holding that prior to issuance of an ex parte temporary restraining order the applicant must demonstrate “reasonable effort in good faith to give notice, in either formal or informal fashion, to either the defendant or his counsel.” (Ante, p. 913.) However, the opinion limits notice to cases affecting substantial First…

2Cases cited33 opinions

  1. Link v. Wabash RailroadSupreme Court of the United States · 1962
  2. Granny Goose Foods, Inc. v. Brotherhood of Teamsters & Auto Truck Drivers, Local No. 70Supreme Court of the United States · 1974
  3. Southeastern Promotions, Ltd. v. ConradSupreme Court of the United States · 1975
  4. Cox v. New HampshireSupreme Court of the United States · 1941
  5. Marsh v. AlabamaSupreme Court of the United States · 1946

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

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

Powered by the Exa API