Hardman

Hardman v. Feinstein

Good Law
195 Cal. App. 3d 157·1987 Cal. App. LEXIS 2175·240 Cal. Rptr. 483
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaSeptember 30, 1987A031244California2,048 words

Opinion

Opinion

Scott, J.

This appeal follows the trial court's order sustaining a demurrer to appellants’ first amended complaint (complaint) without leave to amend on the ground that appellants do not have standing to bring the action. We affirm. A resident and taxpayer of a city who has no special interest in a charitable trust does not have standing to bring an action seeking to enjoin mismanagement of the trust, even though the trust is administered pursuant to a city charter and the trustees are city officials.

I

Procedural Background

The complaint alleges the following. Appellants, Paul D. Hardman, Enola Maxwell, Raymond Clary, Lee Dolson, Earl Moss, and Stanley Smith, are residents and taxpayers of the City and County of San Francisco (City). Respondents, Dianne Feinstein, Eugene Friend, Leonard Kingsley, George Fitch, Alexander Mehran, Diane Phillips, Harry Brooks, Jr., George Coombe, Jr., Charles de Limur, Marie Detert, Charles Gould, William Hambrecht, George Hart, James Harvey, Walter Horn, John Jacobs, John Jones, Stephanie MacColl, Doris Magowan, Bernice Martin, Gail Merriam, Carl Reichardt, Georgette Rosekrans, William Scott, Jr., Emmett Solomon, Alex Spanos, Phyllis Wattis,…

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.