2710 Sutter Ventures, LLC v. Millis (2022)

Citation: 2710 Sutter Ventures, LLC v. Millis (2022)
Parent Document: 2710 Sutter Ventures, LLC v. Millis (2022)
Jurisdiction: California (state)
Effective Date: 2022-08-31
Original Source: https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/7861646/2710-sutter-ventures-llc-v-millis/ ↗

Full Text

1,129 chars

12
III.   The Act Does Not Preempt Section 37.9A(e)(4)7
       We turn first to plaintiffs’ argument that the Act preempts
 section 37.9A(e)(4).
       “ ‘A city or county may make and enforce within its limits
 all local, police, sanitary, and other ordinances and regulations
 that do not conflict with general law. (Cal. Const., art. XI, § 7.) If
 local legislation conflicts with state law, it is preempted by the
 state law and is void.’ ” (Johnson, supra, 137 Cal.App.4th at
 p. 13.)
       “A conflict between local ordinance and state law exists if
 the local law duplicates, contradicts, or regulates an area fully
 occupied by general law, either expressly or by legislative
 implication. [Citation.] ‘The first step in a preemption analysis
 is to determine whether the local regulation explicitly conflicts
 with any provision of state law. [Citation.] [¶] If the local
 legislation does not expressly contradict or duplicate state law,
 its validity must be evaluated under implied preemption
 principles. “In determining whether the Legislature has
 preempted by implication to the exclusion of local regulation we

Other Sections in This Document (66)

Full Text