Legal Opinion
ANDAL v. City of Stockton
California Court of Appeal
Decided February 28, 2006No. C049104PublishedCited by 17 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
DAVIS, Acting P. J.
In this declaratory relief action, plaintiffs allege that a local government fee imposed by the defendant City of Stockton (the City) is unconstitutional because it was not submitted for voter approval. The City successfully demurred to the action, contending that plaintiffs had failed to exhaust their administrative remedies. The City also claims that certain plaintiffs (the cell phone service companies) lack standing to bring the action. Plaintiffs appeal. We reverse.
Background
In June 2004, the City enacted City Ordinance No. 011-04 (the Ordinance), without voter…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Abelleira v. District Court of AppealCalifornia Supreme Court · 1941
- Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Ass'n v. City of La HabraCalifornia Supreme Court · 2001
- Flying Dutchman Park, Inc. v. City & County of San FranciscoCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2001
- Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Ass'n v. City of RosevilleCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2002
- Gowens v. City of BakersfieldCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1960
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by17 opinions
- CHIATELLO v. City and County of San FranciscoCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2010
- TracFone Wireless, Inc. v. County of Los AngelesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2008
- Reid v. City of San Diego, California Court of Appeal, 5th District2018
- McClain v. Sav-On DrugsCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2017
- Sipple v. City of HaywardCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2014
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.