§Why CasetextPricing

BRIGGS v. BROWN

Petitioners, Ron Briggs and John Van de Kamp, Opposition

4 Cited authorities

  1. Perry v. Brown

    52 Cal.4th 1116 (Cal. 2011)   Cited 32 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that “the official proponents of an initiative measure are recognized as having a distinct role—involving both authority and responsibilities that differ from other supporters of the measure”

  2. City and Cty. of San Francisco v. St. of Calif

    128 Cal.App.4th 1030 (Cal. Ct. App. 2005)   Cited 40 times   1 Legal Analyses
    In City and County of San Francisco v. State of California (2005) 128 Cal.App.4th 1030 [ 27 Cal.Rptr.3d 722] (San Francisco), the court outlined general guidelines for allowing permissive intervention.

  3. Section 342 - "Proponent or proponents of an initiative or referendum measure" defined

    Cal. Elec. Code § 342   Cited 12 times

    "Proponent or proponents of an initiative or referendum measure" means, for statewide initiative and referendum measures, the elector or electors who submit the text of a proposed initiative or referendum to the Attorney General with a request that he or she prepare a circulating title and summary of the chief purpose and points of the proposed measure; or for other initiative and referendum measures, the person or persons who publish a notice or intention to circulate petitions, or, where publication

  4. Rule 8.486 - Petitions

    Cal. R. 8.486   Cited 72 times

    (a)Contents of petition (1) If the petition could have been filed first in a lower court, it must explain why the reviewing court should issue the writ as an original matter. (2) If the petition names as respondent a judge, court, board, or other officer acting in a public capacity, it must disclose the name of any real party in interest. (3) If the petition seeks review of trial court proceedings that are also the subject of a pending appeal, the notice "Related Appeal Pending" must appear on the