People Ex Rel. Freitas v. City & County of San Francisco

Good Law
155 Cal. Rptr. 319·1979 Cal. App. LEXIS 1732·92 Cal. App. 3d 913
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMay 11, 1979Civ. 43082California4,611 words

Opinion

Opinion

Rouse, J.

Plaintiffs appeal from a judgment on the pleadings entered in favor of defendants City and County of San Francisco and its board of supervisors (hereafter City and Board). We are asked to decide whether the provisions of the Cartwright Act apply to the City and whether San Francisco has the authority, under the California Constitution, to set taxicab fares.

The instant action was initiated by the District Attorney of the City and County of San Francisco (hereafter District Attorney), who filed an antitrust complaint for injunction, civil penalties and other equitable relief. Permission to intervene was then granted to Richard Spohn, Director of the California Department of Consumer Affairs. Intervener’s complaint was identical to that filed by the District Attorney, except that it added an eighth cause of action. The judgment on the pleadings was granted as to the first cause of action of both complaints and as to the eighth cause of action of the complaint in intervention.

The first cause of action alleged a per se violation of the Cartwright Act (Bus. & Prof. Code, § 16700 et seq.) by defendants’ fixing of taxicab fares. The eighth cause of action in intervener’s…

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.