What is the test for making a claim that the trial court erred in conducting a preelection review of the validity of the proposed ordinance?

California, United States of America

The following excerpt is from City and County of San Francisco v. Patterson, 202 Cal.App.3d 95, 248 Cal.Rptr. 290 (Cal. App. 1988):

Appellant first contends the trial court erred in conducting a preelection review of the validity of the proposed ordinance because an initiative measure may be deleted only where complete invalidity is clear beyond all doubt. (See Gayle v. Hamm (1972) 25 Cal.App.3d 250, 258, 101 Cal.Rptr. 628.) He argues that preelection review is a disfavored remedy, pointing to 18 states which allegedly prohibit such form of challenge.

"The most advanced legal research software ever built."

Try it today free of charge!

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.

Other Questions

On appeal, can the court conduct an independent review of the transcript of the in camera hearing and the records reviewed by the trial court to determine whether any records were improperly withheld? (California, United States of America)

When a defendant makes a mid-trial motion to revoke his self represented status and have standby counsel appointed for the remainder of the trial, does the trial court have a duty to manage the trial? (California, United States of America)

What is the standard of review for a motion of appeal against a finding that the trial court erred in failing to grant a new trial on the grounds of misconduct of counsel? (California, United States of America)

Can a defendant bring a notice of appeal to the Court of Appeal claiming that he failed to raise his constitutional claims in the trial court? (California, United States of America)

How have courts treated a defendant's claim that the trial court erred by refusing to instruct on the elements of rape and sodomy generally? (California, United States of America)

When reviewing a challenge to a suppression ruling, how does the Court of Appeal review the factual findings of the trial court? (California, United States of America)

What is the de novo standard of review applied to a claim that the trial court erred by refusing to instruct the jury on the consumer expectations test? (California, United States of America)

In a sexual assault case, how have the courts dealt with claims that the trial court abused its discretion in excluding evidence of the victim's other sexual conduct? (California, United States of America)

In what circumstances will appellate counsel make an independent review of the trial court proceedings and determine no meritorious claims for appeal? (California, United States of America)

Does the Court of Appeal have any authority to conduct a de novo review of a decision from the trial court? (California, United States of America)

What is the test for making a claim that the trial court erred in conducting a preelection review of the validity of the proposed ordinance?

"The most advanced legal research software ever built."

Other Questions

Trusted by top litigators from across North America.

Company

Product

Resources