Legal Opinion
California Redevelopment Ass'n v. Matosantos
California Court of Appeal
Decided January 24, 2013No. C064907; No. C065329; No. C065390PublishedCited by 20 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
*1464Opinion
HULL, J.
Responding to a fiscal emergency declared by the Governor on July 1, 2009, the Legislature enacted Assembly Bill No. 4X 26 (2009-2010 4th Ex. Sess.), requiring redevelopment agencies throughout the state to contribute portions of their property tax increment funding for the 2009-2010 and 2010-2011 fiscal years into supplemental educational revenue augmentation funds (SERAF’s) to be used for financing K-12 education in redevelopment areas. (Assem. Bill No. 4X 26 (2009-2010 4th Ex. Sess.) (hereafter Assembly Bill 4X 26), enacted as Stats. 2009, 4th Ex. Sess. 2009-2010, ch. 21, §§…
2Cases cited35 opinions
- Mills v. GreenSupreme Court of the United States · 1895
- Serrano v. PriestCalifornia Supreme Court · 1977
- Serrano v. PriestCalifornia Supreme Court · 1971
- Amador Valley Joint Union High School District v. State Board of EqualizationCalifornia Supreme Court · 1978
- People v. Eric J.California Supreme Court · 1979
30 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by20 opinions
- City of Cerritos v. State of CaliforniaCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2015
- City of Grass Valley v. Cohen, California Court of Appeal, 5th District2017
- Saltonstall v. City of SacramentoCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2014
- Community Youth Athletic Center v. City of National CityCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2013
- Cuenca v. CohenCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2017
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.