Buhl

Buhl v. Hannigan

Good Law
16 Cal. App. 4th 1612·1993 Cal. App. LEXIS 696·20 Cal. Rptr. 2d 740·93 Daily Journal DAR 8501·2 Am. Disabilities Cas. (BNA) 1385
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJune 30, 1993G012245California5,674 words

Opinion

Opinion

Sonenshine, J.

Plaintiffs and Appellants Timothy Buhl, Jerald Bowman, Guru Bir Singh Khalsa and Peter Daniels appeal from a court order denying their motion for a preliminary injunction. Plaintiffs seek to enjoin the state from enforcing California’s Mandatory Motorcycle Helmet Law, Vehicle Code section 27802 et seq. (helmet law) during the pendency of their action to have the law declared unconstitutional. Defendants and respondents, sued in their official capacities, are Maurice Hannigan, Commissioner of the California Highway Patrol (CHP), Frank Zolin, Director of the Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV), Brad Gates, Sheriff of Orange County, and Paul Walters, Chief of Police of Santa Ana.

Appellants contend the helmet law is unconstitutionally vague. They further claim it impermissibly discriminates against the handicapped, interferes with the free exercise of religion, and infringes on the individual’s right to privacy and freedom of expression. They argue the intrusion is not justified by any legitimate state concern. They contend if the injunction does not issue, they will suffer irreparable harm in that they will be forced to choose, during the pendency of the action, either to…

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.