What is the test for independent review of evidence in a motion to restrict the width of Baldwin Avenue?
California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from Markley v. City Council, 131 Cal.App.3d 656, 182 Cal.Rptr. 659 (Cal. App. 1982):
"It is argued that under the decision in Strumsky ... the court constitutionally was required to independently review the evidence. Such argument is misplaced. The requirement applies only where a fundamental vested right is involved and on this record we cannot hold that petitioners' interest in the width of Baldwin Avenue was such a right...."
In Mountain Defense League v. Board of Supervisors, supra, 65 Cal.App.3d 723, 135 Cal.Rptr. 588, an unincorporated association
Page 666
"The most advanced legal research software ever built."
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.
