DiCampli-Mintz v. County of Santa Clara
California Supreme Court
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
CORRIGAN, J.
Government Code 1 section 915, subdivision (a) (section 915(a)), establishes the manner of delivery of a claim against the government. It requires that a claim be presented to a local public entity by “[delivering it to the clerk, secretary or auditor,” or by mailing it to one of these officials “or to the governing body.” Section 915, subdivision (e) (section 915(e)), further provides that a misdirected claim “shall be deemed to have been presented in compliance” with section 915 if “[i]t is actually received by the clerk, secretary, auditor or board of the local public…
2Cases cited34 opinions
- State v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 2004
- Shirk v. Vista Unified School DistrictCalifornia Supreme Court · 2007
- City of Stockton v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 2007
- California Federal Savings & Loan Ass'n v. City of Los AngelesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1995
- DeYoung v. City of San DiegoCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1983
29 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by108 opinions
- Rubenstein v. Doe No. 1California Supreme Court · 2017
- Meddock v. County of Yolo CA3California Court of Appeal · 2013
- Wormuth v. Lammersville Union Sch. Dist.District Court, E.D. California · 2018
- People v. BellCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2015
- Ramirez v. Tulare County District Attorney's OfficeCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2017
103 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.