Skip to main content
INTERNAL PROTOTYPE — NOT LEGAL ADVICE — DO NOT SEND

Section 1808

Citation
Section 1808
Parent Document
McHugh v. Santa Monica Rent Control Board, 777 P.2d 91 (1989)
Jurisdiction
California (state)
Effective Date
1989-08-17

Other Sections in This Document (387)

Full Text

1,094 chars
Our sister courts have emphasized aspects of the federal courts’ “public rights” concept (discussed post, pp. 381-385) as well as other concerns, such as the existence of the action at common law, and the nexus between the challenged power and the agency’s regulatory purpose. Read together with their discussions of the judicial powers issue, we adduce from these decisions the following proposition: Once a court has determined that exercise of a challenged administrative power meets the “substantive limitations” requirement imposed by the state constitution’s judicial powers doctrine— i.e., the challenged activities are authorized by statute or legislation, and are reasonably necessary to, and primarily directed at, effectuating the administrative agency’s primary, legitimate regulatory purposes—then the state constitution’s jury trial provision does not operate to preclude administrative adjudication. Neither plaintiff, nor the amicus curiae and interveners appearing on her behalf, offer a compelling reason to reach a different conclusion under our own constitutional provision.