Legal Opinion

Carrera v. Bertaini

California Court of Appeal

Decided November 12, 1976No. Civ. 2713PublishedCited by 15 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

FRANSON, J.

Introduction

In this case we declare that the Kings County ordinance allowing the impoundment and sale of farm animals found to be “at large” upon any street or public place or upon any private property against the wishes of the owner of the property, and Penal Code section 597f, to the extent that it commands the impoundment of any farm animal “neglected” by its owner, are constitutionally invalid for failure to provide the owner or person entitled to possession of the animals a reasonable notice and hearing as required by the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.1…

2Cases cited16 opinions

  1. Mathews v. EldridgeSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
  2. Fuentes v. ShevinSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
  3. Boddie v. ConnecticutSupreme Court of the United States · 1971
  4. Bell v. BursonSupreme Court of the United States · 1971
  5. Sniadach v. Family Finance Corp. of Bay ViewSupreme Court of the United States · 1969

11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by15 opinions

  1. Hugh C. Porter v. Susan Diblasio, Dane County Humane Society, Paul W. Humphrey, and Dane CountyCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1996
  2. Rupf v. YanCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2000
  3. Phillips v. San Luis Obispo County Department of Animal RegulationCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1986
  4. Daskalea v. Washington Humane SocietyDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2007
  5. Menefee & Son v. Department of Food & AgricultureCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1988

10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API