Scott

Scott v. Common Council

Good Law
1996 Cal. App. LEXIS 339·44 Cal. App. 4th 684·52 Cal. Rptr. 2d 161·96 Daily Journal DAR 4489·96 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 2711
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaApril 16, 1996E015306California5,793 words

Opinion

Opinion

Hollenhorst, J.

The trial court signed a judgment and issued a peremptory writ of mandate commanding the Common Council of the City of San Bernardino (Common Council) to reinstate and fund two city attorney investigator positions which were deleted by its budget resolution No. 94-163. The Common Council appeals.

Facts and Procedural History

Resolution No. 94-163 is a resolution adopting the city’s budget for the fiscal year 1994-1995. The petition for writ of mandate, filed July 6, 1994, alleges that the Common Council violated the San Bernardino City Charter (City Charter), section 55, subdivision (d), by adopting the city’s budget for the 1994-1995 fiscal year.

The City of San Bernardino is a charter city. (Cal. Const., art. XI, §§ 6, 8; Gov. Code, §§ 34101, 34450 et seq.) City Charter section 55, subdivision (d), prescribes the duties of the city attorney, including the duty to represent the city in actions brought against it, and the duty to prosecute certain violations of state law.

The 1994-1995 budget of the city eliminated the only two investigator positions in the city attorney’s office. The petition alleges that the Common Council had a legal duty to provide the city…

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.