legal news


Register | Forgot Password

EPSTEIN v. SUPERIOR COURT OF THE CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO

EPSTEIN v. SUPERIOR COURT OF THE CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO
06:12:2011

EPSTEIN v

EPSTEIN v. SUPERIOR COURT OF THE CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO








Filed 3/30/11





CERTIFIED FOR PUBLICATION

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

SIXTH APPELLATE DISTRICT


JERRY B. EPSTEIN et al.,

Petitioners,

v.

THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO,

Respondent;

EDMUND G. BROWN, JR., as Governor, etc., et al.,

Real Parties in Interest.

H036365
(San Francisco County
Super. Ct. No. CGC10505436)


Plaintiffs Jerry Epstein, A. Redmond Doms, and Donald A. Casper brought this action against the Governor, the Acting Director of the Department of General Services (Director), and the Department of General Services (Department), seeking to prevent the Department's sale and leaseback of 11 state office buildings pursuant to authority granted by the Legislature as a budget-balancing measure. (See Gov. Code, § 14670.13 (§ 14670.13).) The trial court refused to preliminarily enjoin the sale, and plaintiffs petitioned this court for an extraordinary writ to compel the trial court to do so. We issued an order to show cause and stayed the sale pending further briefing. While the matter was pending, a new governor took office. When he and the other defendants filed their return, on February 10, 2011, they asserted that he had â€




Description Plaintiffs Jerry Epstein, A. Redmond Doms, and Donald A. Casper brought this action against the Governor, the Acting Director of the Department of General Services (Director), and the Department of General Services (Department), seeking to prevent the Department's sale and leaseback of 11 state office buildings pursuant to authority granted by the Legislature as a budget-balancing measure. (See Gov. Code, § 14670.13 (§ 14670.13).) The trial court refused to preliminarily enjoin the sale, and plaintiffs petitioned this court for an extraordinary writ to compel the trial court to do so. We issued an order to show cause and stayed the sale pending further briefing. While the matter was pending, a new governor took office. When he and the other defendants filed their return, on February 10, 2011, they asserted that he had â€
Rating
0/5 based on 0 votes.

    Home | About Us | Privacy | Subscribe
    © 2024 Fearnotlaw.com The california lawyer directory

  Copyright © 2024 Result Oriented Marketing, Inc.

attorney
scale