"California Supreme Court"

In a unanimous decision published today, the California Supreme Court held that the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department (LASD) could share with prosecutors the names of deputies on its “Brady list” in particular cases without seeking a court order after a Pitchess motion.  The Court held that the LASD would not violate Pitchess “by

couthouse-flag.JPGThis post was authored by Alison R. Kalinski

The California Supreme Court today reversed the Court of Appeal in City of San Jose v. Superior Court (Smith), and held that communications by a city employee concerning public business on a personal account, such as email, phone or computer, may be subject to disclosure under

Breaking-News1.jpgOn October 13, 2015, California Attorney General Kamala D. Harris issued a Published Opinion, No. 12-401, relevant to a law enforcement agency’s dual responsibilities to comply with Brady v. Maryland and California’s Pitchess statutes in the wake of the California Supreme Court’s recent decision in People v. Superior Court (Johnson).  The Attorney General approved, over

Fire-Helmet.jpgIn a long anticipated decision, the California Supreme Court has held that a supervisor’s daily log, or file, was not a “file used for any personnel purposes” under the Firefighters Procedural Bill of Rights.  In 2013, the Court of Appeal ruled that a fire captain’s daily log documenting firefighter performance should have been disclosed to

DOLThis post was authored by Jessica Frier

Federal COBRA legislation allows departing employees and dependents to continue coverage under an employer’s group health plan after coverage is lost for almost any reason—including death, divorce, reduction in hours, and even termination for cause.  Only the employee’s “gross misconduct” provides a basis to deny COBRA coverage.

But

Breaking-News1.jpgThis blog post was written by David Urban and Shardé C. Thomas

Today the California Supreme Court issued a 6-1 decision in Long Beach Police Officers Association v. City of Long Beach.  The case involves the issue of whether police departments are required in response to California Public Records Act (“CPRA”) requests to disclose

Fire Helmet.jpgOn February 26, 2014, the California Supreme Court agreed to review the Court of Appeal decision in Poole v. Orange County Fire Authority.

Given the nearly identical language in the Public Safety Officers Bill of Rights Act (“POBR”) as in the Firefighters’ Procedural Bill of Rights Act (“FBOR”), this case will affect law enforcement

AnotherGavel.jpgThis blog post was authored by Meredith Karasch

On August 13, 2013, the California Supreme Court issued its long awaited ruling on the issue of whether nurses are the only school personnel who may administer insulin to diabetic students.  Looking to the plain meaning of state law, it answered that question in the negative.  This

couthouse-flag.JPGHarris v. City of Santa Monica has been pending before the California Supreme Court since 2011.  On December 4, 2012, the Supreme Court held oral arguments, and issued its long-awaited opinion on February 7, 2013.  The issue pending before the Supreme Court was whether giving a mixed-motive jury instruction under California’s Fair Employment and Housing