Case law

Opinion No. (2001)

California Attorney General Reports · Feb 1, 2001

Code Regs., tit., 16, §§ 16:301 - 16:390.6 ) adopted by the State Board of Chiropractic Examiners ("Board") as authorized by the Act (see Act, § 4, subd. … Board of Medical Quality Assurance (1980) 101 Cal.App.3d 80 ), or sale of drug paraphernalia (see AB Cattle Co. v. City of Escondido (1987) 192 Cal.App.3d 1032 ).

Opinion No. (2000)

California Attorney General Reports · Feb 23, 2000

In Hicks v. Board of Supervisors (1977) 69 Cal.App.3d 228 , 241 , the court stated: ". . . … (See United States v. Auten (5th Cir. 1980) 632 F.2d 478 , 481 ; see also In re Brown (1998) 17 Cal.4th 873 , 879 .)

Opinion No. (2006)

California Attorney General Reports · Aug 10, 2006

and the board grants the charter." ( Sequoia Union High School Dist. v. … The State Board of Education ("Board") has complied with the Legislature's mandate by adopting regulations governing the state funding of charter schools for their nonclassroom-based instruction, including distance learning

Opinion No. (2002)

California Attorney General Reports · Mar 8, 2002

(See Pacific Finance Corp. v. … Transit Authority v. Pub. Util. Com. (1963) 59 Cal.2d 863 , 870 ; Board of Railroad Commissioners v. Market Street Railway Company (1901) 132 Cal. 677 , 678-680 ; Webster's 3d New Internat.

Untitled California Attorney General Opinion

California Attorney General Reports · Jul 25, 1995

Brown Act (Gov. Code, '' 54950-54962; "Act")1 generally provides that the legislative body of a local agency must hold its meetings open to the public except as expressly provided in the Act. … Ass'n v.

Untitled California Attorney General Opinion

California Attorney General Reports · Aug 5, 2021

(e) (defining “appropriations” as “[a]uthorizations by the board to make expenditures and to incur obligations for specific purposes”); Albright v. … Co. v.

Untitled California Attorney General Opinion

California Attorney General Reports · Apr 4, 2019

(See Alcala v. … Co. v. Lopez (2013) 215 Cal.App.4th 1385, 1401; Kaufman & Broad Communities, Inc. v. Performance Plastering, Inc. (2005) 133 Cal.App.4th 26, 35; see also Pollack v.

Opinion No. (2001)

California Attorney General Reports · Jul 12, 2001

(Downs v. Los Angeles Unified School District (9th Cir. 2000) 228 F.3d 1003 , 1009 ; California Teachers Assn. v. Governing Board, supra, 45 Cal.App.4th at p. 1388 .) … (California Teachers Assn. v. Governing Board, supra, 45 Cal.App.4th at p. 1392 .)

Opinion No. (1998)

California Attorney General Reports · Jul 29, 1998

We believe that a district board may authorize representation by a non-attorney. … In Garcia v. Los Angeles County Bd.

Opinion No. (2005)

California Attorney General Reports · Mar 28, 2005

Currently, the Trust has a board of directors of five members, who serve without compensation; the board consists of two city council members, a former city mayor, a member of the county board of supervisors, and a city resident … (See Clark v.

Untitled California Attorney General Opinion

California Attorney General Reports · Apr 7, 2022

The application asserts that the Board of Education invalidly appointed Shaw to a vacancy on the Board in violation of Government Code section 1752(a) and the common law prohibition against self-appointments. … First, quo warranto is an available and appropriate remedy here as Wright’s core contention is that Shaw—via an appointment alleged to be unlawful and invalid—is 4 104 Ops.Cal.Atty.Gen., supra, at pp. 59-60; see Rando v.

Untitled California Attorney General Opinion

California Attorney General Reports · Jun 17, 2022

A County Board of Supervisors is a legislative body, not an advisory body. (See Gov. Code, § 23005.) 9 82 Ops.Cal.Atty.Gen. 83, 84 (1999); see also Moore v. Panish (1982) 32 Cal.3d 535, 545. 10 Pub. Util. … Lacey v. Robles (2020) 44 Cal.App.5th 804, 811; see 98 Ops.Cal.Atty.Gen. 94, 95 (2015). 14 98 Ops.Cal.Atty.Gen., supra, at p. 96. 15 Ibid. 16 See People ex rel. Lacey v.

Opinion No. (1999)

California Attorney General Reports · Apr 21, 1999

"In Schaefer v. … Nevertheless, as indicated in Neigel v.

Opinion No. (2006)

California Attorney General Reports · Mar 3, 2006

When the officer with the proscribed financial interest is a member of a public body or board, the prohibition of section 1090 extends to the entire body or board — here, the city council. … Agency, Inc. v.

Opinion No. (1998)

California Attorney General Reports · Nov 17, 1998

Code, §§ 1797 - 1799.207 ; "Act") 1 to establish a statewide system for providing emergency medical services to those in need thereof. ( Valley Medical Transport, Inc . v. … Apple Valley Fire Protection Dist . (1998) 17 Cal.4th 747 , 754 ; County of San Bernardino v. City of San Bernardino (1997) 15 Cal.4th 909 , 914-916 .)

Opinion No. (2006)

California Attorney General Reports · Nov 22, 2006

When the officer with the proscribed financial interest is a member of a public body or board, the prohibition extends to the entire body or board. As the court observed in Fraser-Yamor Agency, Inc. v. … (See, e.g., Thomson v.

Opinion No. (1997)

California Attorney General Reports · Dec 5, 1997

As explained by the Supreme Court in Dyna-Med., Inc . v. … (See Tot v. U.S . (1943) 319 U.S. 463 , 466-468 ; Rafaelli v. Committee of Bar Examiners (1972) 7 Cal.3d 288 , 291-301 ; Mike Moore's 24-Hour Towing v. City of San Diego (1996) 45 Cal.App.4th 1294 , 1306 .)

Untitled California Attorney General Opinion

California Attorney General Reports · Aug 23, 2018

Fair Employment & Housing Com. (1987) 43 Cal.3d 1379, 1386- 1387. 7 Ibid. 8 Skillin v. Rady Children’s Hospital-San Diego (2017) 18 Cal.App.5th 35, 47; Gananian v. … (b). 21 We also note that in Fenton v.

Untitled California Attorney General Opinion

California Attorney General Reports · Aug 23, 2018

Chapman v. … (Cerini v.

Opinion No. (2006)

California Attorney General Reports · Jan 24, 2006

(See Moore v. California State Bd. of Accountancy (1992) 2 Cal.4th 999 , 1011-1012 ; Dyna-Med, Inc. v. Fair Employment Housing Com. (1987) 43 Cal.3d 1379 , 1391 , fn. 14; Texas Commerce Bank v. … Garamendi (1992) 11 Cal.App.4th 460 , 471 , fn. 3; Martin v. Holiday Inns, Inc. (1988) 199 Cal.App.3d 1434 , 1437 ; People v. Stout (1971) 18 Cal.App.3d 172 , 177 .) In Harris v.