Introducing ATLASLearn more
Legal Opinion

City of Bell Gardens v. County of Los Angeles

California Court of Appeal

Decided July 2, 1991No. B048866PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

ORTEGA, Acting P. J.

We conclude the trial court properly enjoined defendants County of Los Angeles and the Sheriff’s Department of the County of Los Angeles from unlawfully interfering with the playing of pai gow, pai gow poker, and pan 9 at the Bell Gardens Bicycle Club, the California Commerce Club, the El Dorado Club, and the Normandie Club (the card clubs). We affirm the judgment and impose sanctions on appeal against the county.

Background

Pai gow, pai gow poker and pan 9 (the pai gow games) share a common betting format: The position of dealer rotates systematically among the…

2Cases cited19 opinions

  1. In Re Marriage of FlahertyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1982
  2. Finnie v. Town of TiburonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1988
  3. Young v. RosenthalCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1989
  4. Summers v. City of Cathedral CityCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1990
  5. Weil v. BarthelCalifornia Supreme Court · 1955

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

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Pierotti v. TorianCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2000
  2. People Ex Rel. Department of Transportation v. Outdoor Media GroupCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1993
  3. In Re WhitakerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1992
  4. Collisson & Kaplan v. HartunianCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1994
  5. Pierotti v. TorianCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2000

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

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

View API DocsGet API Key

Powered by the Exa API