Association of California Insurance Companies v. Poizner
California Court of Appeal
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
MALLANO, P. J.
In 1988, the voters of California enacted an initiative measure designated on the ballot as Proposition 103. Proposition 103 required approval of insurance rate increases by the Insurance Commissioner of the State of California (Commissioner), provided for consumer participation in the administrative ratesetting process, and permitted the recovery of advocacy and witness fees and expenses (together referred to as compensation) under certain circumstances. This lawsuit involves the validity of the 2006 amendments to regulations permitting consumer interest interveners to…
2Cases cited17 opinions
- Yamaha Corp. of America v. State Board of EqualizationCalifornia Supreme Court · 1998
- Arias v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 2009
- Murphy v. Kenneth Cole Productions, Inc.California Supreme Court · 2007
- Calfarm Insurance v. DeukmejianCalifornia Supreme Court · 1989
- California Assn. of Psychology Providers v. RankCalifornia Supreme Court · 1990
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by12 opinions
- Association of California Insurance Companies v. JonesCalifornia Supreme Court · 2017
- New Cingular Wireless PCS, LLC v. Public Utilities CommissionCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2016
- Batt v. City and County of San FranciscoCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2010
- San Francisco Apartment Ass'n v. City & County of San FranciscoCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2016
- Sierra Club v. Napa County Board of SupervisorsCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2012
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.