Legal Opinion

Stribling v. Mailliard

California Court of Appeal

Decided April 9, 1970No. Civ. 26863PublishedCited by 15 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

DEVINE, P. J.

Plaintiffs seek judicial intervention under six causes of action (abatement of nuisance, prevention of waste of city funds, injunction against ultra vires acts, declaratory relief in the matter of a secret enact ment, injunction against action allegedly denying due process and equal protection, and declaratory relief in general as to police officers’ duties). Despite the several causes, there is but one essential question: may the courts intervene to prevent the enforcement of regulation No. 7.11.2 of the San Francisco Police Commission, which provides that every officer,…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Eye Dog Foundation v. State Board of Guide Dogs for the BlindCalifornia Supreme Court · 1967
  2. Lockard v. City of Los AngelesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1949
  3. Adler v. City CouncilCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1960
  4. Old Town Dev. Corp. v. Urban Renewal Agency of MontereyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1967
  5. Wilson v. Transit AuthorityCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1962

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

3Cited by15 opinions

  1. Morris v. County of MarinCalifornia Supreme Court · 1977
  2. California State Employees' Ass'n v. FlournoyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1973
  3. Centinela Hospital Assn. v. City of InglewoodCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1990
  4. Griffis v. County of MonoCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1985
  5. Griswold v. Mt. Diablo Unified School DistrictCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1976

10 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