Legal Opinion

Bixby v. Pierno

California Supreme Court

Decided February 23, 1971No. L.A. 29689PublishedCited by 471 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

TOBRINER, Acting C. J.

In this case we are called upon to determine whether a superior court properly refused to exercise its independent judgment in reviewing a decision of the Commissioner of Corporations approving a recapitalization plan. For the reasons stated herein, we conclude that the judgment must be affirmed: the trial court properly followed our long established approach to the judicial review of a decision of a statewide non-constitutional agency, and applied to the decision the test of whether or not it was supported by substantial evidence. The trial court correctly found…

2Cases cited85 opinions

  1. In Re WINSHIPSupreme Court of the United States · 1970
  2. Universal Camera Corp. v. National Labor Relations BoardSupreme Court of the United States · 1951
  3. Marbury v. MadisonSupreme Court of the United States · 1803
  4. Goldberg v. KellySupreme Court of the United States · 1970
  5. Securities & Exchange Commission v. Chenery Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1947

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

3Cited by471 opinions

  1. Strumsky v. San Diego County Employees Retirement Assn.California Supreme Court · 1974
  2. People v. AndersonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1972
  3. Topanga Assn. for a Scenic Comm. v. CTY OF LOS ANGELESCalifornia Supreme Court · 1974
  4. Hensler v. City of GlendaleCalifornia Supreme Court · 1994
  5. Fukuda v. City of AngelsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1999

466 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