Wheatherford

DISCUSSION

I. Standard of Review

Interpretation of a statute presents questions of law for the court to decide, and is reviewed de novo. (Ramirez v. Yosemite Water Co. (1999) 20 Cal.4th 785, 794; Fredenburg v. City of Fremont (2004) 119 Cal.App.4th 408, 419; Evid. Code, § 310, subd. (a).) Plaintiff raises issues regarding the interpretation and application of section 526a and whether it may be read in a manner to afford her taxpayer standing. The de novo standard of review, therefore, applies in this case.

II. Taxpayer Standing Under Section 526a

Section 526a provides, in relevant part: “An action to obtain a judgment, restraining and preventing any illegal expenditure of, waste of, or injury to, the estate,

1 Vehicle Code section 14602.6, subdivision (a)(1) provides, in part: “Whenever a peace officer determines that a person was driving a vehicle while his or her driving privilege was suspended or revoked, driving a vehicle while his or her driving privilege is restricted pursuant to Section 13352 or 23575 and the vehicle is not equipped with a functioning, certified interlock device, or driving a vehicle without ever having been issued a driver’s license, the peace officer…