FindLaw Government Relations Summaries - May 27-June 02, 2011

Weekly Opinion Summaries Government Relations Cases May 27-June 02, 2011 FindLaw.com Weekly Government Relations Newsletter Quick Links Cases & Codes Careers LawBrain Legal Market Center Lawyer Directory Lawyer Marketing You may forward this e-mail in its entirety. Table of Contents Government Relations Cases Jensen Family Farms, Inc. v. Monterey Bay Unified Air Pollution Control District Roberts v. Dept. of Veterans Affairs Spicer v. City of Camarillo Cal. Restaurant Management Systems v. City of San Diego Sierra Club v. Superior Court Groninger v. Village of Mamaroneck Walsh v. Katz FindLaw's case summaries are copyrighted material and are not intended for republication without prior approval. You may, however, freely redistribute this e-mail in its entirety. To view the full-text of cases you must sign in to FindLaw.com. SPONSOR Government Relations Cases United States Ninth Circuit, 05/27/2011 Jensen Family Farms, Inc. v. Monterey Bay Unified Air Pollution Control District, No. 09-16790 In a dispute arising from the defendant's adoption and enforcement of emission rules that regulate diesel-powered engines, judgment on the pleadings by district court is affirmed where regulations are preempted by the Federal Clean Air Act, 42 U.S.C. sections 7401 et seq. Read more... United States Federal Circuit, 06/01/2011 Roberts v. Dept. of Veterans Affairs, No. 2010-7104 In a dispute involving the severance of veterans benefits based on a finding of fraud, judgment of the trial court is affirmed where: 1) benefits were properly severed in accordance with the VA’s regulations in lieu of the procedures set forth in the Program Fraud Civil Remedies Act of 1986, 31 U.S.C. section 3801 et seq.; and 2) the VA was not required to review claimant's medical records for alternate stressors before severing his benefits, when the only stressor cited in his ratings decision and the underlying PTSD examination were found to be fraudulent. Read more... California Court of Appeal, 05/31/2011 Spicer v. City of Camarillo, No. B228357 In an action for declaratory and injunctive relief involving the scope of defendant-city's parking ordinance, Municipal Code section 11.12.010, which limits parking times on city streets, and Vehicle Code section 22511.5(a)(1)(B), judgment of the trial court in favor of the defendant is affirmed where: 1) a disabled person displaying the appropriate placard may enjoy unrestricted street parking only where a posted sign limits parking; and 2) a decision by a county court commissioner, stating that the defendant's interpretation of section 22511.5 is irrational and a violation of equal protection of the law, is not res judicata. Read more... SPONSOR California Court of Appeal, 06/01/2011 Cal. Restaurant Management Systems v. City of San Diego, No. D056695 In a dispute arising from a governmental claim action, Gov. Code section 810 et seq., seeking a refund for excessive charges on defendant's wastewater system management, judgment of the trial court dismissing action as untimely is affirmed because the quitable tolling principles enumerated in American Pipe does not apply to extend the period within which a claim must be filed under the Government Claims Act. Read more... California Court of Appeal, 05/31/2011 Sierra Club v. Superior Court, No. G044138 In a petition for a writ of mandate challenging an order denying petitioner public access to a government database associated with a geographic information system pursuant to the California Public Records Act (the Act), Gov. Code section 6250 et seq., petition is denied where section 6254.9 of the Act excludes such a disclosure. Read more... Court of Appeals of New York, 06/02/2011 Groninger v. Village of Mamaroneck, No. 85 In a personal injury action against defendant-municipality after plaintiff slipped and fell on ice in a parking lot owned by defendant, summary judgment in favor of defendant is affirmed where defendant neither received prior written notice of the defect nor created the icy condition. Read more... Court of Appeals of New York, 06/02/2011 Walsh v. Katz, No. 94 In a dispute involving the constitutionality of the residency requirement for the elected position of town justice, Election Law section 16-102, order of the appeals court is affirmed where the the residency requirement, applying a rationale basis test, does not violate the equal protection clause. Read more... SPONSOR FindLaw includes summaries of all Supreme and Appellate Court slip opinions posted on the official Illinois Courts site. FindLaw summaries include opinions that have not yet been released for publication and may be subject to modification, correction or withdrawal. Check the Illinois Courts site to determine if a specific opinion has been released before relying on that case as precedent. Feedback We value your comments! Please take a moment to tell us what you think by sending us an e-mail. Subscription Information Click here to subscribe to a FindLaw Newsletter. To unsubscribe, click here. Advertising Information For more information about advertising in FindLaw Newsletters, click here. 800 W. California Ave., Sunnyvale, CA 94086

You are currently subscribed to ccc-government as: ideola09.petra@blogger.com .
To manage your newsletter accounts go to: http://newsletters.findlaw.com/sub/review-account.jsp