California Court of Appeal

The trial court did not err in denying plaintiff's petition for a writ of mandate to compel the state agency that supervises the administration of public welfare services by the state's counties to exercise its supervisory mandate and alter the computer system, and the governing structure that oversees the system, to prevent the system from executing automatic functions that terminate or reduce aid if the recipient fails to submit required eligibility reports within certain deadlines unless the case worker inputs the required information upon the recipient’s ultimate submittal, where: 1) plaintiffs sought mandamus relief to compel the exercise of discretion in a particular manner, something a writ of mandate cannot do; and 2) plaintiffs submitted exhibits which contradicted their factual claims that the state agency was not fulfilling its duty to supervise or that the counties were failing to comply with law on account of the computer system's operation.

Appellate Information

• Decided 11/13/2013
• Published 11/13/2013

Judges

• NICHOLSON

Court

• California Court of Appeal

Counsel