Some important news for litigants in writ proceedings who seek to appeal – on July 29, 2024, the California Supreme Court in Meinhardt v. City of Sunnyvale established the rule for when the time clock for an appeal begins to run in a petition for writ of administrative mandate case. It does not begin
"California Supreme Court"
Supreme Court Hears Oral Argument in Case on Race Conscious Admissions in Higher Education
On October 31, 2022, the U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments in two cases: Students for Fair Admissions v. University of North Carolina and Students for Fair Admissions v. President and Fellows of Harvard. The Court’s resulting decision now stands to determine the fate of race-conscious admissions in higher education.
Brief Factual Background
Holistic…
Smith Receives a Reprieve as the Supreme Court Turns its Attention to Questions of Compelled Speech
In June 2021, the Supreme Court declined an invitation to overturn Employment Division, Department of Human Resources of Oregon v. Smith, its seminal 1990 case holding that a facially neutral and generally applicable law survives a challenge under the Free Exercise Clause if it is rationally related to a legitimate government interest. However, the…
California First District Court of Appeal Decision Disagrees With Santa Ana POA Case and Holds That Peace Officers Under Administrative Investigation Are NOT Automatically Entitled to Reports and Complaints Prior to Any Further Interrogation
On April 26, 2021, the First District Court of Appeal published its decision in Oakland Police Officers Association v. City of Oakland (2021) — Cal.App.5th — (“Oakland POA”). The case provides critical guidance regarding what information a law enforcement agency must provide to a peace officer before conducting a second or subsequent interrogation…
Governor Signs AB 5 into Law Codifying ABC Test for Determining Independent Contractor Status
Yesterday, on September 18, 2019, Governor Gavin Newsom signed Assembly Bill No. 5 (AB 5) into law. AB 5 codifies the “ABC” test for determining independent contractor status that the California Supreme Court adopted in its 2018 decision in Dynamex Operations West, Inc. v. Superior Court (2018) 4 Cal.5th 903. AB 5 adds section 2750.3…
California Supreme Court Holds that Law Enforcement Agency May Disclose “Brady List” to Prosecutors Notwithstanding Pitchess Statutes
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…
Writings Concerning Public Business Are Public Records – Even If They Are Sent, Received, Or Stored On An Employee’s Personal Email, Phone, Or Computer
This 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…
California Supreme Court Decides Landmark Case on Mandated Rest Breaks
This blog post was authored by Jeffrey C. Freedman.
California law requires employers in most private businesses to allow employees to take breaks, or rest periods, of at least ten minutes for roughly each four hours of work. Can an employer require employees during their breaks to keep their pagers and radio phones on,…
Attorney General Issues Opinion Approving Brady List Procedures
On 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…
The California Supreme Court Holds that a Supervisor’s Daily Log is not a “File Used for Any Personnel Purposes” Under the Firefighters Procedural Bill of Rights
In 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…