Legal Opinion
Arcadia Redevelopment Agency v. Ikemoto
California Court of Appeal
Decided June 9, 1993No. B057768PublishedCited by 9 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
HINZ, J.
Introduction
Concluding that the Legislature violated no constitutional or statutory provision in enacting section 97 and related sections of the California Revenue and Taxation Code, we deny a writ of mandamus challenging the implementation of that statute.
On April 11, 1991, in the California Supreme Court, petitioners filed a petition for writ of mandate and requested an immediate stay. Petitioners are redevelopment agencies of the following cities: Arcadia; Culver City; Lynwood; Moreno Valley; Redondo Beach; San Jose; Santa Ana; and Santa Clara. Respondents are: Daniel O.…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- In Re EstradaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1965
- California Teachers Ass'n v. San Diego Community College DistrictCalifornia Supreme Court · 1981
- In Re Marriage of BouquetCalifornia Supreme Court · 1976
- Methodist Hosp. of Sacramento v. SaylorCalifornia Supreme Court · 1971
- Armstrong v. County of San MateoCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1983
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- City of Cerritos v. State of CaliforniaCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2015
- City of Alhambra v. County of Los AngelesCalifornia Supreme Court · 2012
- County of Sonoma v. Commission on State MandatesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2000
- Ortland v. County of TehamaDistrict Court, E.D. California · 1996
- Community Redevelopment Agency v. County of Los AngelesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2001
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.