Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Stand up for California v. State of Cal.

California Court of Appeal

Decided December 12, 2016No. F069302Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in part

DETJEN, J.,

Concurring and Dissenting.—I join in the disposition as stated in the lead opinion. The trial court erred in sustaining the demurrers. I do not, however, think the analysis reaches the question of whether the Governor has “concurring” authority because, on the facts of this case, he could not exercise the limited authority to compact granted to him by article IV, section 19, subdivision (1) of the California Constitution (added by Prop. 1A, eff. Mar. 7, 2000).

This case arises from a complicated interplay between the federal law governing the acquisition and use of lands held in…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. Rumsey Indian Rancheria of Wintun Indians v. WilsonCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1994
  2. Genesis Environmental Services v. San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control DistrictCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2003
  3. California Commerce Casino, Inc. v. SchwarzeneggerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2007
  4. Citizens Against Casino Gambling v. ChaudhuriCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2015
  5. Flynt v. California Gambling Control CommissionCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2002

8 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