Motion: Writ of Mandate (x2)
Tentative Ruling:
To deny the writs.
Explanation:
The record and briefs in these matter are voluminous, and the court is well aware of the serious and complex issues presented. This Tentative Ruling is provided to assist counsel in tailoring their oral arguments to the court.
Cease & Desist Order
Standard of Review
When the trial court reviews an administrative decision pursuant to a petition for writ of mandate, it determines “whether the respondent has proceeded without, or in excess of, jurisdiction; whether there was a fair trial; and whether there was any prejudicial abuse of discretion.” (Code Civ. Proc., § 1094.5, subd. (b).) “Abuse of discretion is established if the respondent has not proceeded in the manner required by law, the order or decision is not supported by the findings, or the findings are not supported by the evidence.” (Ibid.)
“Where it is claimed that the findings are not supported by the evidence, in cases in which the court is author
Hearing Date
January 30, 2020
Type
02 Unlimited - Writ of Mandate
For full print and download access, please subscribe at https://www.trellis.law/.
Motion: Writ of Mandate (x2)
Tentative Ruling:
To deny the writs.
Explanation:
The record and briefs in these matter are voluminous, and the court is well aware of the serious and complex issues presented. This Tentative Ruling is provided to assist counsel in tailoring their oral arguments to the court.
Cease & Desist Order
Standard of Review
When the trial court reviews an administrative decision pursuant to a petition for writ of mandate, it determines “whether the respondent has proceeded without, or in excess of, jurisdiction; whether there was a fair trial; and whether there was any prejudicial abuse of discretion.” (Code Civ. Proc., § 1094.5, subd. (b).) “Abuse of discretion is established if the respondent has not proceeded in the manner required by law, the order or decision is not supported by the findings, or the findings are not supported by the evidence.” (Ibid.)
“Where it is claimed that the findings are not supported by the evidence, in cases in which the court is author