California Court of Appeal

In an action involving an alleged breach of a "Regulatory Agreement" pursuant to a statutory and regulatory low-income housing scheme, dismissal of the complaint is reversed and remanded where: 1) the trial court erroneously concluded that plaintiff's sole remedy was a petition for administrative mandamus pursuant to Code of Civ. Pro. section 1094.5; 2) read in its entirety, plaintiff's complaint was not fatally vague as to whether defendant breached a mandatory or discretionary duty; and 3) plaintiff sufficiently pled a viable action for breach of contract and could pursue declaratory relief.

Appellate Information

• Decided 04/10/2008
• Published 04/10/2008

Judges

• SIMS, Acting P.J.

Court

• California Court of Appeal

Counsel

• For Appellant:
  
• Jay-Allen Eisen Law Corporation, Jay-Allen Eisen and C. Athena Roussos, Sacramento, for Plaintiff and Appellant.


• For Appellees:
  
• Edmund G. Brown Jr., Attorney General, Tom Greene, Mary E. Hackenbracht, Assistant Attorneys General, Teri H. Ashby and Kenneth J. Pogue, Deputy Attorneys General, for Defendant and Respondent.