Wilson

Wilson v. Eu

Bad Law
1991 Cal. LEXIS 4656·286 Cal. Rptr. 625·54 Cal. 3d 546·91 Daily Journal DAR 13082·817 P.2d 890
Supreme Court of CaliforniaOctober 23, 1991S022835California694 words

Opinion

Opinion

On September 25, 1991, this court exercised its original jurisdiction by ordering issuance of an alternative writ of mandate contemplating the drafting and adoption by this court of reapportionment plans for the state’s legislative, congressional and State Board of Equalization districts. (Wilson v. Eu, ante, p. 471 [ 286 Cal.Rptr. 280 , 816 P.2d 1306 ] [hereafter Wilson I]).

In Wilson I, we indicated it was “appropriate that we appoint three Special Masters to hold public hearings to permit the presentation of evidence and argument with respect to proposed plans of reapportionment. [Citation.]” (Supra, ante, at p. 473.) On September 26, pursuant to the foregoing order, we appointed the Honorable George A. Brown, retired Presiding Justice of the Court of Appeal, Fifth Appellate District, the Honorable Rafael H. Galceran, retired Judge of the Los Angeles County Superior Court, and the Honorable Thomas Kongsgaard, retired Judge of the Napa County Superior Court, as Special Masters on Reapportionment, and we designated Justice Brown as Presiding Master.

In Wilson I, we directed the Masters to commence public hearings within 30 days of their appointment, and to present…

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.