CABINDA v. Santa Monica Rent Control Bd., 95 Cal. Rptr. 2d 676 (2000)
- Citation
- CABINDA v. Santa Monica Rent Control Bd., 95 Cal. Rptr. 2d 676 (2000)
- Parent Document
- CABINDA v. Santa Monica Rent Control Bd., 95 Cal. Rptr. 2d 676 (2000)
- Jurisdiction
- California (state)
- Effective Date
- 2000-08-23
Other Sections in This Document (53)
- CABINDA v. Santa Monica Rent Control Bd., 95 Cal. Rptr. 2d 676 (2000)
- CABINDA v. Santa Monica Rent Control Bd., 95 Cal. Rptr. 2d 676 (2000)
- CABINDA v. Santa Monica Rent Control Bd., 95 Cal. Rptr. 2d 676 (2000)
- CABINDA v. Santa Monica Rent Control Bd., 95 Cal. Rptr. 2d 676 (2000)
- CABINDA v. Santa Monica Rent Control Bd., 95 Cal. Rptr. 2d 676 (2000)
- CABINDA v. Santa Monica Rent Control Bd., 95 Cal. Rptr. 2d 676 (2000)
- CABINDA v. Santa Monica Rent Control Bd., 95 Cal. Rptr. 2d 676 (2000)
- CABINDA v. Santa Monica Rent Control Bd., 95 Cal. Rptr. 2d 676 (2000)
- CABINDA v. Santa Monica Rent Control Bd., 95 Cal. Rptr. 2d 676 (2000)
- CABINDA v. Santa Monica Rent Control Bd., 95 Cal. Rptr. 2d 676 (2000)
- CABINDA v. Santa Monica Rent Control Bd., 95 Cal. Rptr. 2d 676 (2000)
- CABINDA v. Santa Monica Rent Control Bd., 95 Cal. Rptr. 2d 676 (2000)
- CABINDA v. Santa Monica Rent Control Bd., 95 Cal. Rptr. 2d 676 (2000)
- CABINDA v. Santa Monica Rent Control Bd., 95 Cal. Rptr. 2d 676 (2000)
- CABINDA v. Santa Monica Rent Control Bd., 95 Cal. Rptr. 2d 676 (2000)
- CABINDA v. Santa Monica Rent Control Bd., 95 Cal. Rptr. 2d 676 (2000)
- CABINDA v. Santa Monica Rent Control Bd., 95 Cal. Rptr. 2d 676 (2000)
- CABINDA v. Santa Monica Rent Control Bd., 95 Cal. Rptr. 2d 676 (2000)
- CABINDA v. Santa Monica Rent Control Bd., 95 Cal. Rptr. 2d 676 (2000)
- CABINDA v. Santa Monica Rent Control Bd., 95 Cal. Rptr. 2d 676 (2000)
- CABINDA v. Santa Monica Rent Control Bd., 95 Cal. Rptr. 2d 676 (2000)
- CABINDA v. Santa Monica Rent Control Bd., 95 Cal. Rptr. 2d 676 (2000)
- CABINDA v. Santa Monica Rent Control Bd., 95 Cal. Rptr. 2d 676 (2000)
- CABINDA v. Santa Monica Rent Control Bd., 95 Cal. Rptr. 2d 676 (2000)
- CABINDA v. Santa Monica Rent Control Bd., 95 Cal. Rptr. 2d 676 (2000)
- CABINDA v. Santa Monica Rent Control Bd., 95 Cal. Rptr. 2d 676 (2000)
- CABINDA v. Santa Monica Rent Control Bd., 95 Cal. Rptr. 2d 676 (2000)
- CABINDA v. Santa Monica Rent Control Bd., 95 Cal. Rptr. 2d 676 (2000)
- CABINDA v. Santa Monica Rent Control Bd., 95 Cal. Rptr. 2d 676 (2000)
- CABINDA v. Santa Monica Rent Control Bd., 95 Cal. Rptr. 2d 676 (2000)
- CABINDA v. Santa Monica Rent Control Bd., 95 Cal. Rptr. 2d 676 (2000)
- CABINDA v. Santa Monica Rent Control Bd., 95 Cal. Rptr. 2d 676 (2000)
- CABINDA v. Santa Monica Rent Control Bd., 95 Cal. Rptr. 2d 676 (2000)
- CABINDA v. Santa Monica Rent Control Bd., 95 Cal. Rptr. 2d 676 (2000)
- CABINDA v. Santa Monica Rent Control Bd., 95 Cal. Rptr. 2d 676 (2000)
- CABINDA v. Santa Monica Rent Control Bd., 95 Cal. Rptr. 2d 676 (2000)
- CABINDA v. Santa Monica Rent Control Bd., 95 Cal. Rptr. 2d 676 (2000)
- Section 1954
- Section 1954
- Section 1954
- Section 1954
- Section 1954
- Section 1954
- Section 1954
- Section 1954
- Section 1954
- Section 1954
- Section 1954
- Section 1954
- Section 1954
- Section 1954
- Section 1954
- Section 1954
Full Text
1,601 charsThe general principles governing preemption analysis are collected in Sherwin-Williams Co. v. City of Los Angeles (1993) 4 Cal.4th 893, 16 Cal.Rptr.2d 215, 844 P.2d 534. If an otherwise valid local law conflicts with general law, it is preempted by the general law and therefore void. A conflict exists if the local legislation duplicates, contradicts, or enters an area fully occupied by the general law, either expressly or by implication. Local legislation duplicates general law when it is coextensive with it. Local legislation is contradictory to general law when it is inimical to it. (Id. at pp. 897-898, 16 Cal.Rptr.2d 215, 844 P.2d 534.) "Finally, local legislation enters an area that is `fully occupied' by general law when the Legislature has expressly manifested its intent to `fully occupy' the area [citation], or when it has impliedly done so in light of one of the following indicia of intent: `(1) the subject matter has been so fully and completely covered by general law as to clearly indicate that it has become exclusively a matter of state concern; (2) the subject matter has been partially covered by general law couched in such terms as to indicate clearly that a paramount state concern will not tolerate further or additional local action; or (3) the subject matter has been partially covered by general law, and the subject is of such a nature that the adverse effect of a local ordinance on the transient citizens of the state outweighs the possible benefit to the' locality. [Citations.]" (Sherwin-Williams, supra, 4 Cal.4th at p. 898, 16 Cal.Rptr.2d 215, 844 P.2d 534.)