View Single Post
  #1  
Old 08-22-2013, 11:04 PM
fizux's Avatar
fizux fizux is offline
Senior Member
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 1,541
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default Schoepf v. Harris (DROS delays)

Schoepf v. Harris
Issue: Petition alleges that Cal. DOJ's policy of issuing DROS delay letters is unlawful; delays are only authorized by PC 28220(e) for non-payment of DROS fees or if purchaser cannot be identified due to incomplete/incorrect info on the DROS application, and may delay only until correct application info/fees are submitted.

Current Status:
As of 3/24/2014 - Case complete.

11/12/2013 - Judgment entered for Defendants.
10/23/2013 - Writ Denied as Moot (given passage of AB 500) {good call, Tincon}.
9/24/2013 - Hearing continued to 10/23/2013.
8/1/2013 - Hearing continued to 9/24/2013 at 8:30am, Dept 51.
5/13/2013 - Answer filed.
4/11/2013 - Petition for Writ of Mandate filed & served.

Trial Court: Cal. Super. Ct. - Fresno
Case No.: 13CECG01132
Docket: http://banweb.co.fresno.ca.us/cprods...trpt_setup_idx
(enter Case No.)

Links:
Wildhawker's thread: http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/s...d.php?t=656150
PC 28220: http://law.onecle.com/california/penal/28220.html
CGF Wiki for this case: (none)
CGF Wiki Litigation page: http://wiki.calgunsfoundation.org/Li...st_and_Present

Last edited by fizux; 03-24-2014 at 7:49 PM.. Reason: Updates
Reply With Quote