Untitled California Attorney General Opinion
17-301
| Cal. Att'y Gen. | Dec 12, 2017Background
- Relator Cotter seeks quo warranto against Meraz and Kadara regarding Deer Creek Storm Water District trusteeship.
- Vacancy arose when a trustee resigned; Meraz was appointed by the remaining trustees to fill the vacancy.
- Kadara was appointed later by the Tulare County Board of Supervisors after a lot-split and purchase.
- Statutes conflict: Government Code 1780 generally allows remaining trustees to fill vacancies; Water Code Appendix 13-6 requires board of supervisors to fill vacancies in storm water districts.
- Court determines Meraz appointment may be invalid and Kadara’s status may be moot depending on title perfection; public interest supports some relief for Meraz but not Kadara.
- Relator seeks to clarify procedures for future vacancies and protect public interest.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Meraz was lawfully appointed to fill the vacancy | Cotter argues remaining trustees lacked authority. | Meraz argues statutes favor their appointment under 1780. | Granted; substantial legal question warrants resolution. |
| Whether Kadara is eligible as a freeholder | Kadara is not currently a freeholder until lot split finalizes. | Kadara contends he will become freeholder upon final title transfer. | Denied; likely moot and public interest not served by suit. |
Key Cases Cited
- Dyna-Med, Inc. v. Fair Employment & Housing Com., 43 Cal.3d 1379 (Cal. Supreme Court 1987) (statutory interpretation and preemption considerations cited)
- Rando v. Harris, 228 Cal.App.4th 868 (Cal. App. 4th 2014) (quo warranto framework and discretion of Attorney General)
- Citizens Utilities Co. v. Super. Ct., 56 Cal.App.3d 399 (Cal. App. 1976) (public office and quo warranto principles)
- In re Marriage of Cutler, 79 Cal.App.4th 460 (Cal. App. 2000) (legislative knowledge and interpretation in statutory analysis)