Legal Opinion

Leal v. Gourley

California Court of Appeal

Decided July 31, 2002No. A096718PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

McGUINESS, P. J.

Government Code 1 section 11435.60 requires that certain state agencies notify parties who may appear before them of their right to an interpreter at hearings conducted by the agencies. Section 11435.60 also requires that the affected agencies give notice of the right to an interpreter “at the same time that each party is advised of the hearing date.”

In this case, the Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV)—an agency subject to the provisions of section 11435.60, pursuant to section 11435.15, subdivision (a)—notified Carlos Q. Leal that he had a right to an interpreter at an…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Lennane v. Franchise Tax BoardCalifornia Supreme Court · 1994
  2. Yordamlis v. ZolinCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1992
  3. Frase v. GourleyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2000

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Pinheiro v. Civil Service Commission for the County of FresnoCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2016
  2. Thornbrough v. Western Placer UnifiedCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2014
  3. Tong v. DMV CA2/2California Court of Appeal · 2013

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

Powered by the Exa API