X hits on this document

Word document

COURT OF APPEAL, FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT - page 6 / 29

72 views

0 shares

0 downloads

0 comments

6 / 29

parts in their context.  [Citation.]  When a demurrer is sustained, we determine whether the complaint states facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action.  [Citation.]  And when it is sustained without leave to amend, we decide whether there is a reasonable possibility that the defect can be cured by amendment: if it can be, the trial court has abused its discretion and we reverse; if not, there has been no abuse of discretion and we affirm.  [Citations.]  The burden of proving such reasonable possibility is squarely on the plaintiff."  (Blank v. Kirwan, supra, 39 Cal.3d at p. 318; accord Rangel v. Interinsurance Exchange (1992) 4 Cal.4th 1, 7.)   

II. Preemption

We decide here whether certain provisions regulating towing companies set out in sections 22658 and 22851.12 are preempted by the FAAAA.  The issue presented is one of law that we address de novo.  (People ex rel. Renne v. Servantes (2001) 86 Cal.App.4th 1081, 1087 (Servantes).)

A.  Principles of Federal Preemption

"Article VI of the Constitution provides that the laws of the United States 'shall be the supreme Law of the Land; . . . any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any state to the Contrary notwithstanding.' "  (Cipollone v. Liggett Group, Inc. (1992) 505 U.S. 504, 516, 517.)  Under the Supremacy Clause, state law that conflicts with federal law is "without effect."  (Ibid., quoting Maryland v. Louisiana (1981) 451 U.S. 725, 746.) Federal Act unless that [is] the clear and manifest purpose of Congress.'  [Citation.]  Accordingly,

6

Document info
Document views72
Page views72
Page last viewedMon Dec 05 18:51:31 UTC 2016
Pages29
Paragraphs130
Words7802

Comments