Legal Opinion
City of Sacramento v. State of California
California Court of Appeal
Decided May 22, 1984No. Civ. 22196PublishedCited by 19 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
CARR, J.
The question tendered by this appeal is whether costs incurred by local governments in complying with the provisions of chapter 2, Statutes 1978 (Chapter 2), which required public employees be covered by the state unemployment insurance law, are “ ‘costs mandated by the state’ ” for which reimbursement is required by Constitution (Cal. Const., art. XIII B, § 6) and statute. (Rev. & Tax. Code, § 2231, subd. (a).) We answer this question in the affirmative, as did the trial court, and accordingly, shall affirm.
Background
Plaintiffs City of Sacramento and County of Los Angeles…
2Cases cited23 opinions
- National League of Cities v. UserySupreme Court of the United States · 1976
- Steward MacHine Co. v. DavisSupreme Court of the United States · 1937
- Amador Valley Joint Union High School District v. State Board of EqualizationCalifornia Supreme Court · 1978
- Bishop v. City of San JoseCalifornia Supreme Court · 1969
- Wildlife Alive v. ChickeringCalifornia Supreme Court · 1976
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by19 opinions
- City of Sacramento v. State of CaliforniaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1990
- County of Los Angeles v. State of CaliforniaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1987
- County of Contra Costa v. State of CaliforniaCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1986
- Carmel Valley Fire Protection v. State of Calif.California Court of Appeal · 1987
- City of Sacramento v. California State LegislatureCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1986
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.