Skip to main content
INTERNAL PROTOTYPE — NOT LEGAL ADVICE — DO NOT SEND

Section 1808

Citation
Section 1808
Parent Document
McHugh v. Santa Monica Rent Control Board, 777 P.2d 91 (1989)
Jurisdiction
California (state)
Effective Date
1989-08-17

Other Sections in This Document (387)

Full Text

1,067 chars
As we explain below, prior California cases provide no direct guidance on the propriety of administrative restitutive money awards. Cases dealing with administrative licensing agencies, however, suggest that such agencies may properly order reparations as a probationary condition of a licensee, and hence these cases shed some light on the issue posed here. Moreover, the decisions of our sister states provide helpful guidance. The out-of-state decisions unanimously hold that an administrative agency may—consistently with the “judicial powers” doctrine—make restitutive money awards provided (i) doing so is reasonably necessary to effectuate the administrative agency’s primary, legitimate regulatory purposes, and (ii) the “essential” judicial power remains ultimately in the courts, through review of agency determinations. We will conclude that these limitations on agency adjudication provide a reasoned and workable test by which to measure challenges under our Constitution’s judicial powers clause, and will adopt that test as our own. a. California cases