LAW OFFICES OF CARLOS R. PEREZ v. WHITTIER UNION HIGH SCHOOL DISTRICT
Case No. 19STCP04238
Hearing Date: September 23, 2020
[TENATIVE] ORDER DENYING PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDATE
Petitioner, Law Offices of Carlos R. Perez, brings its Verified Petition for Writ of Mandate Directing Compliance with the California Voting Rights Act and Award Attorney’s Fees and Costs (the Petition) against Respondent, Whittier Union High School District. Specifically, Petitioner seeks “a peremptory writ of mandate directing Respondent . . . to pay $30,000 in attorney’s fees and costs to [Petitioner] which were necessarily and reasonably incurred in bring about [Respondent’s] compliance, after years of resistance, with the [California Voting Rights Act].” (Pet., Prayer ¶ 1.)[1]
Respondent opposes the Petition.
Evidentiary Objections: Petitioner’s evidentiary objections to the Declaration of Eric Bathen are ruled as follows – Objections 3, 4 and 5 are sustained; the remaining objections are overruled.
Hearing Date
September 23, 2020
Type
Other Writ /Judicial Review (General Jurisdiction)
For full print and download access, please subscribe at https://www.trellis.law/.
LAW OFFICES OF CARLOS R. PEREZ v. WHITTIER UNION HIGH SCHOOL DISTRICT
Case No. 19STCP04238
Hearing Date: September 23, 2020
[TENATIVE] ORDER DENYING PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDATE
Petitioner, Law Offices of Carlos R. Perez, brings its Verified Petition for Writ of Mandate Directing Compliance with the California Voting Rights Act and Award Attorney’s Fees and Costs (the Petition) against Respondent, Whittier Union High School District. Specifically, Petitioner seeks “a peremptory writ of mandate directing Respondent . . . to pay $30,000 in attorney’s fees and costs to [Petitioner] which were necessarily and reasonably incurred in bring about [Respondent’s] compliance, after years of resistance, with the [California Voting Rights Act].” (Pet., Prayer ¶ 1.)[1]
Respondent opposes the Petition.
Evidentiary Objections: Petitioner’s evidentiary objections to the Declaration of Eric Bathen are ruled as follows – Objections 3, 4 and 5 are sustained; the remaining objections are overruled.