Legal Opinion
Golden State Transit Corp. v. City of Los Angeles
Supreme Court of the United States
Decided December 5, 1989No. 88-840PublishedCited by 2 opinions
1Opinion of the Court 1
493 U.S. 103 (1989)
GOLDEN STATE TRANSIT CORP.
v.
CITY OF LOS ANGELES
No. 88-840.
Supreme Court of United States.
Argued October 3, 1989
Decided December 5, 1989
CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
Zachary D. Fasman argued the cause and filed briefs for petitioner.
John F. Haggerty argued the cause and filed a brief for respondent.[*]
2Opinion of the Court · StevensJustice Stevens
In Golden State Transit Corp. v. Los Angeles, 475 U. S. 608 (1986) (Golden State I), we held that the respondent city had violated federal law by conditioning the renewal of petitioner's taxicab franchise on settlement of a pending labor…
Also in this document: Dissent.
3Cases cited42 opinions
- Monell v. New York City Dept. of Social Servs.Supreme Court of the United States · 1978
- Preiser v. RodriguezSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
- Monroe v. PapeSupreme Court of the United States · 1961
- Cort v. AshSupreme Court of the United States · 1975
- San Diego Building Trades Council v. GarmonSupreme Court of the United States · 1959
37 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
4Cited by2 opinions
- Ronnie Stilwell v. City of WilliamsCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2016
- Michiko Gingery v. City of GlendaleCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2016