Legal Opinion
Nadler v. California Veterans Board
California Court of Appeal
Decided March 1, 1984No. Civ. 22437PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
SPARKS, J.
In this appeal we are called upon to determine whether the Department of Veteran Affairs (Department) may cancel a Cal-Vet home purchase contract when it discovers that the veteran purchaser utilizes the property as a secondary or “get-away” home rather than as a principal place of residence. We hold that it may, and shall affirm the judgment of the trial court denying Alvin B. Nadler’s petition for a writ of administrative mandate directed against the California Veterans Board (Board).
The Cal-Vet Program
The Cal-Vet program was summarized in our recent decision in Department…
2Cases cited27 opinions
- Strumsky v. San Diego County Employees Retirement Assn.California Supreme Court · 1974
- Wellenkamp v. Bank of AmericaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1978
- Hall v. City of TaftCalifornia Supreme Court · 1956
- Estate of BairdCalifornia Supreme Court · 1924
- Ralphs Grocery Co. v. ReimelCalifornia Supreme Court · 1968
22 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Dyna-Med, Inc. v. Fair Employment & Housing CommissionCalifornia Supreme Court · 1987
- Fountain Valley Chateau Blanc Homeowner's Ass'n v. Department of Veterans AffairsCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1998
- Dyna-Med, Inc. v. Fair Employment & Housing CommissionCalifornia Supreme Court · 1987
- Davenport v. Unemployment Insurance Appeals BoardCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1994
- Untitled California Attorney General Opinion, California Attorney General Reports1987