What is a Petition for Writ of Administrative Mandate?

Useful Rulings on Petition for Writ of Administrative Mandate

Recent Rulings on Petition for Writ of Administrative Mandate

101-125 of 301 results

GLENN N LEDESMA VS MEDICAL BOARD OF CALIFORNIA

Procedural History On September 30, 2015, Petitioner filed a verified petition for writ of administrative mandate. On October 30, 2015 Respondent filed a return to the petition. On May 26, 2016 the court granted counsel for Petitioner’s motion to be relieved as counsel. Between that date and August 16, 2018, Petitioner alone, or the parties jointly, sought and were granted numerous continuances of the trial setting conference due to health problems Petitioner was experiencing.

  • Hearing

    Dec 04, 2018

  • Type

    Administrative

  • Sub Type

    Writ

ROBERTO VICTOR ILLA, MD VS. THE SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO

On August 27, 2018, Petitioner filed a "Petition for Writ of Administrative Mandate" directing the Medical Board to set aside its decision, and requesting reasonable litigation fees and costs of suit (Case No. 34-2018-80002974). On September 17, 2018, Petitioner filed a "Supplement" to Petition for Writ of Administrative Mandate (Supplement). The Supplement attaches a cover sheet of Petition he attempted to file on May 18, 2018. The Medical Board demurred to, and moved to strike, the Petition.

  • Hearing

    Nov 30, 2018

ROBERTO VICTOR ILLA, MD VS. THE SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO

On August 27, 2018, Petitioner filed a “Petition for Writ of Administrative Mandate” directing the Medical Board to set aside its decision, and requesting reasonable litigation fees and costs of suit (Case No. 34-2018-80002974). On September 17, 2018, Petitioner filed a “Supplement” to Petition for Writ of Administrative Mandate (Supplement). The Supplement attaches a cover sheet of Petition he attempted to file on May 18, 2018. The Medical Board demurred to, and moved to strike, the Petition.

  • Hearing

    Nov 30, 2018

ROBERT VICTOR ILLA, MD VS. THE SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO

On August 27, 2018, Petitioner filed a “Petition for Writ of Administrative Mandate” directing the Medical Board to set aside its decision, and requesting reasonable litigation fees and costs of suit (Case No. 34-2018-80002974). On September 17, 2018, Petitioner filed a “Supplement” to Petition for Writ of Administrative Mandate (Supplement). The Supplement attaches a cover sheet of Petition he attempted to file on May 18, 2018. The Medical Board demurred to, and moved to strike, the Petition.

  • Hearing

    Nov 30, 2018

RUPERT STAINE VS BOARD OF CIVIL SERVICE COMM'R FOR CITY OF L

The Petition seeks a writ of administrative mandate to remedy errors present in the Amended Decision. The Petition alleges that Respondents abused their discretion because the Amended Decision (1) imposes and sustains severe and unconscionable punishment and (2) is not supported by the findings. Respondents have also acted arbitrarily and in excess of their jurisdiction by imposing discipline in violation of the applicable statute of limitations.

  • Hearing

    Nov 27, 2018

  • Type

    Administrative

  • Sub Type

    Writ

JESSE BOGGS VS CITY OF PASADENA ET AL

City of Pasadena, et al; BS170229 Tentative decision on petition for administrative mandate: denied Petitioner Jesse Boggs (“Boggs”) seeks a writ of administrative mandate directing Respondent City of Pasadena (“City”) to set aside its decision upholding three municipal code violation citations. The court renders the following tentative decision. A. Statement of the Case Petitioner Boggs commended this action on July 12, 2017. The unverified Petition alleges in pertinent part as follows.

  • Hearing

    Nov 20, 2018

  • Type

    Administrative

  • Sub Type

    Writ

MORGAN TAYLOR BROWN VS. DENTAL BOARD OF CALIFORNIA, DEPARTMENT OF CONSUMER AFFAIRS

Nature of Proceedings: Petition for Writ of Mandate - Tentative Ruling Petitioner Morgan Brown has filed a petition for writ of administrative mandate seeking to set aside the decision of Respondent, Dental Board of California, denying her application for licensure as a Registered Dental Assistant. The court shall deny the petition as untimely.

  • Hearing

    Nov 16, 2018

MORGAN TAYLOR BROWN VS. DENTAL BOARD OF CALIFORNIA, DEPARTMENT OF CONSUMER AFFAIRS

Nature of Proceedings: Petition for Writ of Mandate – Tentative Ruling Petitioner Morgan Brown has filed a petition for writ of administrative mandate seeking to set aside the decision of Respondent, Dental Board of California, denying her application for licensure as a Registered Dental Assistant. The court shall deny the petition as untimely.

  • Hearing

    Nov 16, 2018

JEREMY LOVE VS DIRECTOR OF DEPT OF MOTOR VEHICLES

California Dept. of Motor Vehicles; BS170620 Tentative decision on petition for administrative mandate: denied Petitioner Jeremy Love (“Love”) requests a writ of administrative mandate commanding Respondent Director of the Department of Motor Vehicles (“DMV”) to set aside its suspension of his driving privilege. The court has read and considered the opposition (no opening brief was filed), and renders the following tentative decision. A.

  • Hearing

    Nov 13, 2018

  • Type

    Other

  • Sub Type

    Intellectual Property

EDGAR L BORNE III VS THE CALIFORNIA BUREAU OF REAL ESTATE

., BS 171574 Tentative decision on petition for writ of administrative mandate: denied Petitioner Edgar L. Borne III (“Borne”) seeks a writ of mandate ordering Respondent California Department of Real Estate (“DRE”) to set aside its decision denying his reapplication for a broker’s license. The court has read and considered the moving papers, opposition, and reply, and renders the following tentative decision. A. Statement of the Case Borne commenced this proceeding on November 15, 2017.

  • Hearing

    Nov 13, 2018

CHARLES HOHMAN VS CITY OF PASADENA ET AL

City of Pasadena, et al; BS170318 Tentative decision on petition for administrative mandate: denied Petitioner Charles Hohman (“Hohman”) seeks a writ of administrative mandate directing Respondent City of Pasadena (“City”) to set aside its decision upholding three municipal code violation citations. The court renders the following tentative decision. A. Statement of the Case Petitioner Hohman commended this action on July 27, 2017.

  • Hearing

    Nov 06, 2018

  • Type

    Administrative

  • Sub Type

    Writ

EDELSON VS COUNTY OF VENTURA RESOURCE

Although substantial evidence supports both alleged violations, the court grants Petitioner Steve Edelson's request for a writ of administrative mandate, solely on the ground that Respondent County of Ventura Board of Supervisors ("the Board") engaged in a prejudicial abuse of discretion by upholding the June 21, 2012 Notice of Violation and Notice of Impending Civil Administrative Penalties ("2012 NOV") notwithstanding the Code Compliance Division of the County of Ventura Resource Management Agency's failure

  • Hearing

    Nov 01, 2018

  • Type

    Administrative

  • Sub Type

    Writ

LA JOLLA BENEFITS ASSOCIATION LLC VS CITY OF SAN DIEGO

Superior Court (1984) 150 Cal.App.3d 933) In this case, the court did not rule on a pleadings motion but held an evidentiary hearing on a writ of administrative mandate and determined that petitioner lacked standing. The Motion for Reconsideration under CCP § 1008 is denied. The court also denies reconsideration under Le Francois v. Goel (2005) 35 Cal.4th 1094. Petitioner wants the court to allow leave to amend to delete petitioner for the entity it has previously argued had standing, A-440 Enterprises.

  • Hearing

    Nov 01, 2018

  • Type

    Other

  • Sub Type

    Intellectual Property

HOSSEIN SOTOOFRH-TEHRANI VS CALIFORNIA PUBLIC EMPLOYEES

California Public Employees’ Retirement System; BS171849 Tentative decision on petition for administrative mandamus: denied Petitioner Hossein Sotoodeh-Tehrani (“Tehrani”) petitions for a writ of administrative mandate commanding Respondent California Public Employees’ Retirement System (“CalPERS”) to set aside its decision denying Tehrani’s application for a disability retirement allowance.

  • Hearing

    Oct 30, 2018

  • Type

    Other

  • Sub Type

    Intellectual Property

DUNCANIE RAY HICKS JR. VS DIR OF THE CA DMV

(“Hicks”) requests a writ of administrative mandate commanding Respondent Director of the Department of Motor Vehicles (“DMV”) to set aside its suspension of his driving privilege. The court has read and considered the moving papers and opposition (no reply was filed), and renders the following tentative decision. A. Statement of the Case Petitioner Hicks commenced this action by verified petition on November 8, 2017, which alleges in pertinent part: Hicks is a resident of Orange County, CA. Pet. at 1.

  • Hearing

    Oct 30, 2018

  • Type

    Administrative

  • Sub Type

    Writ

LUCINDA MALOTT V. SUMMERLAND SANITARY DISTRICT

Background: This is a petition for writ of administrative mandate filed by petitioner Lucinda Malott, successor trustee U/D/T dated September 3, 1998, F/B/O the Carol Nantker Family Trust, (Malott or petitioner) against respondent Summerland Sanitary District (District) challenging Ordinance 19, adopted February 8, 2018, and the sewer service rates set thereby. The petition was filed on April 17, 2018. District filed its answer on May 17, 2018.

  • Hearing

    Oct 29, 2018

ORANGE HOLDINGS, TWO, LLC V. COUNTY OF ORANGE

Petition for Writ of Administrative Mandate: The Petition for Writ of Mandate brought by Petitioner Orange Holdings Two, LLC is DENIED. Based on the Administrative Record submitted by the County of Orange on 01/17/18, and the Assessment Appeals Board on 01/16/18, the court concludes that there is substantial evidence to support the Board’s revision of its Findings of Fact.

  • Hearing

    Oct 25, 2018

JONATHAN CARPIO VS CITY OF LOS ANGELES ET AL

City of Los Angeles; Charlie Beck; et. al BS171214 Tentative decision on petition for mandate: denied Petitioner Jonathan Carpio (“Carpio”) seeks a writ of administrative mandate commanding Respondents City of Los Angeles (“City”) and Chief of Police Charlie Beck (“Chief Beck”) to set aside their decision of probationary termination and to remove various documents and allegations from his personnel file.

  • Hearing

    Oct 23, 2018

  • Type

    Administrative

  • Sub Type

    Writ

COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES VS L A COUNTY CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION

The Petitions Petitioner County of Los Angeles (“County”) petitioned for a writ of administrative mandate seeking to reverse the decision of Respondent Los Angeles Civil Service Commission (“Commission”) to suspend Merritt for 30 days and uphold the County’s decision to terminate Merritt’s employment.

  • Hearing

    Oct 23, 2018

  • Type

    Administrative

  • Sub Type

    Writ

WILLIAM POWERS, JR., ET AL. V. COUNTY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO

Again, here, Petitioners aver they do not seek to proceed with a writ of administrative mandate. However, throughout the papers filed in this action, Petitioners outline the myriad of issues they take with the Hearing and Mr. Underwood’s ruling. Any challenges to the Order are appropriately brought via writ of administrative mandate, not traditional mandate.

  • Hearing

    Oct 23, 2018

MATOZA VS. POLIZZI

Failure to obtain judicial review of a discretionary administrative action by a petition for writ of administrative mandate renders the administrative action immune from collateral attack by any other action. See Patrick Media Group, Inc. v. California Coastal Commission (1992) 9 Cal.App.4th 592, 608. Plaintiffs respond that there is “no damages claim lodged against the State, at least not yet, nor have we protested any decision of the CSLB.”

  • Hearing

    Oct 18, 2018

FANCHER V. RESOURCE MANAGEMENT AGENCY

Demurrer is a permissible response to a Petition for Writ of Administrative Mandate. (CCP 1089; CCP 1109; Stanton v. Dumke (1966) 64 Cal.2d 199, 207.) Procedures applicable to demurrers in general civil actions are applicable. (CCP 1109.) For purposes of assessing the sufficiency of the demurrer, the court is to assume the truth of all well-pleaded facts. (Blank v. Kirwan (1985) 39 Cal. 3d 311, 318; CCP 430.30.) The court will accept as true all facts that may be implied or inferred from those alleged.

  • Hearing

    Oct 17, 2018

DUAL DIAGNOSICS ASSESSMENT & TREATMENT CENTER INC VS. CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH CARE SERVICES

Nature of Proceedings: PETITION FOR WRIT OF ADMINISTRATIVE MANDATE The following shall constitute the Court's tentative ruling on the above matter, set for hearing In Department 27, on Friday, October 12, 2018, at 10:00 a.m.

  • Hearing

    Oct 12, 2018

DUAL DIAGNOSICS ASSESSMENT & TREATMENT CENTER INC VS. CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH CARE SERVICES

Nature of Proceedings: PETITION FOR WRIT OF ADMINISTRATIVE MANDATE The following shall constitute the Court’s tentative ruling on the above matter, set for hearing in Department 27, on Friday, October 12, 2018, at 10:00 a.m.

  • Hearing

    Oct 12, 2018

COMFORT HEALTH THERAPY INC ET AL VS THE CITY OF SAN GABRIEL

On December 18, 2017, Petitioners filed a verified first amended petition (FAP) for writ of administrative mandate and complaint for civil rights violations. The parties stipulated that Petitioners could file a second amended petition “in order to attempt to obviate Respondents’ objections to the First Amended Petition” raised in meet and confer. On January 25, 2018, Petitioners filed a verified second amended petition for writ of administrative mandate and complaint for civil rights violations (“SAP”).

  • Hearing

    Oct 11, 2018

  « first    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ... 13     last » 

For full print and download access, please subscribe at https://www.trellis.law/.

Please wait a moment while we gather your results.