What is a Petition for Writ of Mandate?

Useful Rulings on Petition for Writ of Mandate

Recent Rulings on Petition for Writ of Mandate

PISMO BEACH SELF-STORAGE, L.P. V. CITY OF PISMO BEACH, ET AL.

The Court will grant the petition for a writ of mandate. Request for Judicial Notice. The parties’ requests for judicial notice are granted. (Evid. Code, § 452 (c), (h).)

  • Hearing

    Sep 26, 2020

PHILLIP BAIZ VS. CITY OF SACRAMENTO

He seeks a writ of mandate ordering the City to set aside the administrative penalty. He does not seek a writ of mandate ordering the City to provide him with an appeal hearing, although that is arguably the only remedy to which he would be entitled. (See Sunrise Retirement Villa v.

  • Hearing

    Sep 18, 2020

PHILLIP BAIZ VS. CITY OF SACRAMENTO

He seeks a writ of mandate ordering the City to set aside the administrative penalty. He does not seek a writ of mandate ordering the City to provide him with an appeal hearing, although that is arguably the only remedy to which he would be entitled. (See Sunrise Retirement Villa v.

  • Hearing

    Sep 18, 2020

ANDREW MCGINNIS, ET AL. VS SAN MARINO GARDENS WELLNESS CENTER, LP

The Second District granted a writ of mandate and held that the trial court had abused its discretion in placing obstacles to plaintiffs obtaining the contact information. In its general discussion of the matter, the Second District noted, “Central to the discovery process is the identification of potential witnesses.

  • Hearing

    Sep 18, 2020

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    other

FRANKLIN CREDIT MANAGEMENT VS. WATTS

Indeed, respondents’ position appears to be that a claimant to excess sales proceeds has no remedy of any kind for an error in denying a claim: (1) traditional mandamus is not available because there is no ministerial duty to pay a claim; (2) administrative mandamus is not available because there is no hearing requirement, and; (3) common law claims are not appropriate because review may be had only by way of a petition for a writ of mandate.

  • Hearing

    Sep 17, 2020

BRENT SILVER VS KIARASH Z. TEHRANI, ET AL.,

Seacall Development, supra, 73 Cal.App.4th at 205 (relief based on abandonment proper where attorney filed writ of mandate on behalf of client, ordered hearing transcript and did nothing for two years thereafter, resulting in dismissal for failure to prosecute and client did not discover dismissal of action for over a year and a half).

  • Hearing

    Sep 17, 2020

  • Type

    Real Property

  • Sub Type

    other

  • Judge

    H. Jay Ford

  • County

    Los Angeles County, CA

SLS VENICE HOLDINGS, LLC VS CITY OF LOS ANGELES

Conclusion The first cause of action for writ of mandate is DENIED IN FULL. The second cause of action for declaratory relief is DENIED.

  • Hearing

    Sep 17, 2020

  • Type

    Administrative

  • Sub Type

    Writ

SIMPSON VS CITY OF RIVERSIDE

Why would proceeding as a class action, with its procedural requirements and associated expenses, be preferable to proceeding by a petition for a writ of mandate? 3. Are the plaintiffs contending that a class may not pursue a writ of mandate? 4. Is any of the relief sought by the plaintiffs not recoverable in a petition for writ of mandate? 5. Are the damages sought under the first cause of action are different from the refunds sought in the second cause of action? 6. What discovery is necessary? 7.

  • Hearing

    Sep 17, 2020

TAFT VS CITY OF JURUPA VALLEY HEARING ON WRIT OF MANDATE

The Writ of Mandate is granted to declare MC §11.45.040(B)(4) unconstitutional and denied as to other requested relief. Background: In June 2018, the voters passed Measure B which banned marijuana dispensaries and businesses in the City of Jurupa Valley. (Administrative Record (AR) 0099; Municipal Code (“MC”) §11.28.010 et. seq.)

  • Hearing

    Sep 16, 2020

GREG CHAVEZ VS KATHLEEN WEBB

WEBB Case Number: 19STCP02125 Hearing Date: September 16, 2020 [Tentative] ORDER DENYING PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDATE

  • Hearing

    Sep 16, 2020

  • Type

    Administrative

  • Sub Type

    Writ

ADRIAN QUINTERO VS. CALIFORNIA STATE PERSONNEL BOARD

Nature of Proceedings: PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDATE The following shall constitute the Court’s tentative ruling on the petition for writ of mandate which is scheduled to be heard by the Court on Tuesday, September 15, 2020 at 1:30 p.m. in Department 21.

  • Hearing

    Sep 15, 2020

ADRIAN QUINTERO VS. CALIFORNIA STATE PERSONNEL BOARD

Nature of Proceedings: PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDATE The following shall constitute the Court's tentative ruling on the petition for writ of mandate which is scheduled to be heard by the Court on Tuesday, September 15, 2020 at 1:30 p.m. in Department 21.

  • Hearing

    Sep 15, 2020

RESIDENTS FOR ORCUTT SENSIBLE GROWTH V. COUNTY OF SB

County of Merced (2003) 110 Cal.App.4th 362, 373 [trial court directed to issue peremptory writ of mandate where record so poorly prepared it was impossible to determine what findings pertained to the the lack of feasibility of the project alternatives and the reasons for rejecting those alternatives]; No Oil, Inc. v.

  • Hearing

    Sep 15, 2020

MOSS V MOORPARK LITTLE LEAGUE

Plaintiff has failed to allege sufficient facts in the First Amended Complaint to support the causes of action for Writ of Mandate and IIED against Defendant. With respect to the cause of action for writ relief, the FAC prays for the remedy that MLL be compelled to rescind its expulsion of Plaintiff and reinstate his membership retroactively for the 2019 season. The remedy sought is not for a "fair hearing denied to him."

  • Hearing

    Sep 15, 2020

  • Type

    Administrative

  • Sub Type

    Writ

JANNETTE VERBERA VS ARPINEH KESHISHIAN, ET AL.

In Williams, the Supreme Court addressed a writ of mandate of the denial of discovery in a PAGA action. Nearly identical to the questions raised in the instant interrogatories before this court, “Williams issued two special interrogatories asking Marshalls to supply the name, address, telephone number, and company employment history of each nonexempt California employee in the period March 2012 through February 2014, as well as the total number of such employees.” (Id. at p. 539.)

  • Hearing

    Sep 15, 2020

  • Type

    Employment

  • Sub Type

    Other Employment

  • Judge Elaine Lu
  • County

    Los Angeles County, CA

JOHN RIOS VS CITY OF BALDWINPARK

In Tracy Press, a newspaper filed a petition for writ of mandate concerning a CPRA request against a city, after contending that the city failed to produce emails of a city councilmember from her personal computer at home through her private email account. 164 Cal.App.4th at 1294.

  • Hearing

    Sep 15, 2020

  • Type

    Administrative

  • Sub Type

    Writ

JOHN RIOS VS CITY OF BALDWIN PARK

In Tracy Press, a newspaper filed a petition for writ of mandate concerning a CPRA request against a city, after contending that the city failed to produce emails of a city councilmember from her personal computer at home through her private email account. 164 Cal.App.4th at 1294.

  • Hearing

    Sep 15, 2020

  • Type

    Administrative

  • Sub Type

    Writ

IMPERIAL IRRIGATION DISTRICT VS. RIVERSIDE COUNTY BOARD OF

On February 25, 2020, the court overruled Respondents’ demurrer to the petition for writ of mandate in the SAP and denied Respondents’ motion to strike paragraphs 55-101 and paragraph 1 of the prayer for the first cause of action for writ of mandate. The court did not rule on the demurrer to the second through fifth causes of action, or motion to strike paragraphs 102-130 and prayers for the second and third causes of action.

  • Hearing

    Sep 15, 2020

  • Type

    Administrative

  • Sub Type

    Writ

NICOLE MEHRINGER VS MICHAEL MOORE, ET AL.

Judge Mary Strobel Hearing: September 15, 2020 19STCP00781 Tentative Decision on Petition for Writ of Mandate: DENIED Petitioner Nicole Mehringer (“Petitioner”) petitions for a writ of mandate directing Respondents City of Los Angeles, Los Angeles Police Department (“LAPD”), and Michel Moore, Chief of Police (collectively “Respondents” or “City”) to set aside the City’s decision terminating Petitioner’s employment as a Commander with LAPD.

  • Hearing

    Sep 15, 2020

  • Type

    Administrative

  • Sub Type

    Writ

BULLETTI VS. CALIFORNIA DEPT.

Bulletti’s petition for issuance of writ of mandate is denied with leave to file a petition that deletes the names of any individual defendants and names the proper defendant (DOR).

  • Hearing

    Sep 14, 2020

  • Judge

    Burch

  • County

    Contra Costa County, CA

RICHARD HERNANDEZ VS CITY OF COMMERCE, ET AL.

Second, all four of Plaintiff’s causes of action seek a writ of mandate. While the third cause of action seeks injunctive relief independently of the request for a writ of mandate, the remaining three causes of action appear to position the requests for declaratory and injunctive relief as alternatives to a writ of mandate, rather than as free-standing requests for relief (“Therefore, as an alternative to or in conjunction with injunctive relief, the Court should issue a writ of mandate…”).

  • Hearing

    Sep 14, 2020

  • Type

    Other

  • Sub Type

    Intellectual Property

FAY V. TAHOE-TRUCKEE SANITATION

While the case cited above references a CEQA writ of mandate, same the rationale applies here. There is no requirement that the agency prepare the record at its own expense. Further, there is no ministerial duty to compel the Agency to act. Thus, the motion for judgment and the petition for writ of mandate are denied.

  • Hearing

    Sep 11, 2020

SACRAMENTO CITY TEACHERS ASSOCIATION VS. SACRAMENTO CITY UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT BOARD OF TRUSTEES

Petitioner filed a writ of mandate, arguing that one of the Planning Commissioners was biased and he was denied a fair hearing. Through the petitioner’s deposition of the Commissioner, the petitioner learned that Commissioner authored an article for his neighborhood association opposing the project. (Nasha, supra, 125 Cal.App. 4th at p. 480.) The trial court denied the petition.

  • Hearing

    Sep 11, 2020

SACRAMENTO CITY TEACHERS ASSOCIATION VS. SACRAMENTO CITY UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT BOARD OF TRUSTEES

Petitioner filed a writ of mandate, arguing that one ofthe Planning Commissioners was biased and he was denied a fair hearing. Through the petitioner's deposition ofthe Commissioner, the petitioner learned that Commissioner authored an article for his neighborhood association opposing the project. {Nasha, supra, 125 Cal.App. 4th at p. 480.) The trial court denied the petition.

  • Hearing

    Sep 11, 2020

  • Judge

    STEVEN M. G E V E R C E R

  • County

    Sacramento County, CA

GURNICK ACADEMY OF MEDICAL ARTS VS. BOARD OF VOCATIONAL NURSING & PHYCHIATRIC TECHNICIANS

On June 30, 2020, Gurnick filed its Verified Petition and Complaint for Writ of Mandate, Writ of Prohibition, and Declaratory Relief (Petition). Gurnick's Petition seeks a writ of mandate pursuant tQ Code of Civil Procedure section 1085, and a writ of prohibition pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure sections 1102 and 1103, prohibiting the Board from attempting to "rescind" Gurnick's ongoing admissions at one of its vocational schools.

  • Hearing

    Sep 11, 2020

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ... 194     last » 

For full print and download access, please subscribe at https://www.trellis.law/.

Please wait a moment while we gather your results.