From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Golden State Water Co. v. Casitas Municipal Water District

California Court of Appeals, Second District, Sixth Division
May 13, 2015
No. B255408 (Cal. Ct. App. May. 13, 2015)

Opinion


Page 529c

236 Cal.App.4th 529c __ Cal.Rptr.3d __ GOLDEN STATE WATER COMPANY, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. CASITAS MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT et al., Defendants and Respondents. No. B255408 California Court of Appeals, Second District, Sixth Division May 13, 2015

THE COURT:

IT IS ORDERED the opinion filed on April 14, 2015, 235 Cal.App.4th 1246,___ Cal.Rptr.3d ___ be modified as follows and the petition for rehearing is DENIED:

On page 1 [235 Cal.App.4th 1249, advance report, 1st full par. of opinion, and 2d par., line 2], the first paragraph and the first sentence of the second paragraph are deleted. In the second sentence of the second paragraph, a hyphen is inserted between "sky" and "high".

On page 4 [235 Cal.App.4th 1252, advance report, 1st par., line 3], last paragraph, in the sixth and seventh lines, the phrase "the issue" is replaced with "Golden State's standing".

On page 6, second paragraph, in the ninth line [235 Cal.App.4th 1253, advance report, 2d par., line 10], the phrase "compulsory purchase" is de-italicized.

On page 8, second full paragraph, in the fourth and fifth lines [235 Cal.App.4th 1255, advance report, 1st par., lines 4-7], the phrase "which does not directly affect the jurisdiction of the legislative body to order the installation of the facility or the provision of service" is de-italicized and, in the sixth and seventh lines, the citation "(Ibid., italics added.)" is replaced with "(Ibid.)".

On page 11, second full paragraph, in the fifth line [235 Cal.App.4th 1257, advance report, 2d full par., lines 6 and 9], the phrase "entire bill" is de-italicized and, in the last line, "fn. 2" is replaced with "fn. 2. italics omitted".

On pages 14-15 [235 Cal.App.4th 1260, advance report, 1st full par.], the paragraph following "Conclusion" is replaced with the following:

Page 529d

Golden State advocates for a rule that would shift the bargaining power decisively in its favor. "While an interesting conversation might be had about whether this was reasonable or wise, we can find no room for arguing" it as a matter of statutory interpretation. (Capistrano Taxpayers Association, Inc. v. City of San Juan Capistrano (2015) 235 Cal.App.4th 1493, 1507-1508 [___ Cal.Rptr.3d ___].) Like the trial court, we will not set aside the lawfully expressed will of the voters.

There is no change in the judgment.

Golden State Water Company's petition for rehearing is denied.


Summaries of

Golden State Water Co. v. Casitas Municipal Water District

California Court of Appeals, Second District, Sixth Division
May 13, 2015
No. B255408 (Cal. Ct. App. May. 13, 2015)
Case details for

Golden State Water Co. v. Casitas Municipal Water District

Case Details

Full title:GOLDEN STATE WATER COMPANY, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. CASITAS MUNICIPAL…

Court:California Court of Appeals, Second District, Sixth Division

Date published: May 13, 2015

Citations

No. B255408 (Cal. Ct. App. May. 13, 2015)