Wednesday, February 07, 2007

CA Supreme Court says "No thanks" on AB 1381

Feb 7 - 4LAKidsNews - The Supreme Court denied the Mayor's Petition to Transfer today - apparently they don't think the case is as important or urgent as we all do!

This means that the case continues on an expedited schedule in the Court of Appeal; the case will be heard there on April 2nd.

According to a one line posting in the Supreme Court of California Conference Results for 2/7/2007, posted on the Supreme Court website ( on 2/7/2007: The petition to transfer (to skip the court of appeal and have the case heard directly by the Supreme Court on an expedited basis) in MENDOZA, ET AL v. STATE OF CALIFORNIA – where the Superior Court threw out AB 1381 giving the Mayor of Los Angeles governance authority over LAUSD [case # S149380 CA# B195835] is DENIED. - smf

UPDATE: High court denies quick ruling on L.A. Unified takeover

By Maura Dolan, LA Times Staff Writer

February 8, 2007 - The California Supreme Court refused Wednesday to immediately review a ruling that has prevented Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa from taking partial control of the Los Angeles school district.

The state high court's decision means the school district's challenge of mayoral control will remain before the 2nd District Court of Appeal in Los Angeles. That court will hear arguments in early April and probably decide the case 30 to 60 days later.

Villaraigosa had sought to bypass the appeals court in hopes of expediting the case and winning a ruling that would uphold a state law giving him significant authority over schools. Los Angeles County Superior Court Judge Dzintra Janavs struck down the law in December.

The state high court rarely takes cases until they have been argued before an intermediate appeals court.

Fred Woocher, a lawyer for the Los Angeles Unified School District, said the district did not oppose state high court review but was "definitely not upset" about the delay. The eventual ruling by the appeals court is expected to be challenged, and the Supreme Court will have to decide once again whether to review the case.

No comments: