Meinhardt

Meinhardt v. City of Sunnyvale

Good Law
Supreme Court of CaliforniaAugust 22, 2024S274147MCalifornia6,947 words

Opinion

Opinion

Jenkins, J.

Opinion of the Court by Jenkins, J.

This includes special proceedings such as administrative mandate proceedings. (§ 22 [“[a]n action is an ordinary proceeding”]; § 23 [“special proceeding” is “[e]very other remedy”]; § 1110 [appellate rules and procedures that apply to civil actions apply to writs of review, mandate, and prohibition].)

2. The sentence on page 20 of the opinion that states, “To the contrary, section 1110 explicitly provides that appellate rules and procedures that apply to civil actions apply to all special proceedings” is deleted in its entirety and replaced with the following:

To the contrary, section 1110 explicitly provides that appellate rules and procedures that apply to civil actions apply to writs of review, mandate, and prohibition.

This modification does not affect the judgment.

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF

CALIFORNIA

DAVID MEINHARDT,

Plaintiff and Appellant, v.

CITY OF SUNNYVALE,

Defendant and Respondent;

SUNNYVALE DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY,

Real Party in Interest and Respondent.

S274147

Fourth Appellate District, Division One

D079451

Santa Clara County Superior Court 19CV346911

July 29, 2024

Justice Jenkins authored the opinion of the…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.