Case # | Name | Category | Court | Judge | Published |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
00-1293
|
Ashcroft v. American Civil Liberties Union
Child Online Protection Act's use of 'community standards' to identify 'material that is harmful to minors' does not render statute facially unconstitutional. |
Constitutional Law |
|
May 20, 2002 | |
00-799
|
City of Los Angeles v. Alameda Books Inc.
City may rely on report containing crime statistics to justify regulation of adult entertainment establishments. |
Constitutional Law |
|
May 20, 2002 | |
99-5130
|
Falvo v. Owasso Independent School District No. I-011
Peer grading among students does not violate right to privacy. |
Constitutional Law |
|
May 14, 2002 | |
98-56200
|
Alameda Books Inc. v. City of Los Angeles
Municipalities may only enforce ordinance prohibiting multiple-use adult businesses if ordinance meets strict scrutiny. |
Constitutional Law |
|
May 13, 2002 | |
01-344
|
Thompson v. Western States Medical Center
Advertising restrictions for compounded drugs constitute unconstitutional restraints on commercial speech. |
Constitutional Law |
|
May 13, 2002 | |
C034318
|
Waremart v. Progressive Campaigns Inc.
Private grocery store not situated in shopping center has right to deny individuals soliciting signatures from congregating outside their establishment |
Constitutional Law |
|
May 9, 2002 | |
C033172
|
Young v. Raley's Inc.
Under California Constitution freestanding supermarket isn't public forum and may exclude plaintiffs from engaging in petitioning activities absent compliance with permit procedure. |
Constitutional Law |
|
May 8, 2002 | |
99-56887
|
Daniel v. County of Santa Barbara
Predecessor in interest's irrevocable offer to dedicate easement to county bars subsequent takings action by present owner. |
Constitutional Law |
|
May 1, 2002 | |
A086142
|
Kasky v. Nike Inc.
Public relations campaign to counteract accusations that company engaged in exploitive labor practices is not commercial speech under First Amendment. |
Constitutional Law |
|
May 1, 2002 | |
00-35466
|
Hargis v. Foster
Triable issue of fact exists whether application of prison coercion regulation violated prisoner's free speech rights. |
Constitutional Law |
|
Apr. 30, 2002 | |
00-1167
|
Tahoe -Sierra Preservation Council Inc. v. Tahoe Regional Planning Agency
Agency's 32-month moratoria on development in Lake Tahoe Basin does not constitute per se takings of property. |
Constitutional Law |
|
Apr. 30, 2002 | |
99-17424
|
Western States Medical Center v. Shalala
Government fails to justify restrictions on advertisements for compounded drugs. |
Constitutional Law |
|
Apr. 28, 2002 | |
99-16896
|
Allen v. Iranon
Whistleblower of inmate abuse prevails in retaliation claim against Hawaii Dept. of Corrections. |
Constitutional Law |
|
Apr. 26, 2002 | |
00-795
|
Ashcroft v. Free Speech Coalition
Statute that prohibits 'virtual child pornography' is unconstitutional. |
Constitutional Law |
|
Apr. 22, 2002 | |
01SC281
|
The City of Commerce City, Colorado v. State of Colorado
Provisions regulating use of automated vehicle identification systems are constitutional. |
Constitutional Law |
|
Apr. 22, 2002 | |
00-1385
|
Planned Parenthood of the Rocky Mountains Services Corp. v. Owens
Abortion statute that lacks health exception for parental notification requirement is unconstitutional. |
Constitutional Law |
|
Apr. 18, 2002 | |
99-56205
|
City of South Pasadena v. Mineta
In new action between parties, state's sovereign immunity defense is not waived where defense was waived in prior action. |
Constitutional Law |
|
Apr. 8, 2002 | |
D035997
|
Costco Companies Inc. v. Gallant
Costco's time, place and manner restrictions on use of its premises for expressive activities are valid. |
Constitutional Law |
|
Apr. 5, 2002 | |
00-55117
|
Wilkins v. United States
Feres doctrine does not bar claims for nonmonetary relief. |
Constitutional Law |
|
Apr. 5, 2002 | |
01-15152
|
Gardner v. State Bar of Nevada
State Bar's public relations campaign does not violate attorney's First Amendment rights. |
Constitutional Law |
|
Apr. 1, 2002 | |
00-16415
|
American Family Assn. Inc. v. City and County San Francisco
City and County of San Francisco's resolutions condemning anti-gay advertisements do not violate First Amendment. |
Constitutional Law |
|
Mar. 25, 2002 | |
00CA1698
|
Timm v. Reitz
Trial court erred in dismissing claims that a policy requiring random drug testing by licensees of the division of racing is an unconstitutional search. |
Constitutional Law |
|
Mar. 21, 2002 | |
01-313
|
Opinion of Bill Lockyer
County ordinance may prohibit inter-candidate transfers of campaign funds to avoid 'funneling' where valid contribution limit exists. |
Constitutional Law |
|
Mar. 13, 2002 | |
A083530
|
San Remo Hotel v. City and County of San Francisco
Fee imposed pursuant to Hotel Conversion Ordinance is an unconstitutional taking |
Constitutional Law |
|
Mar. 11, 2002 | |
B151669
|
Washington Mutual Bank, FA v. Superior Court (Guilford)
Challenges to pre-escrow interest on home loans under state consumer protection acts are pre-empted by Home Owners' Loan Act. |
Constitutional Law |
|
Mar. 8, 2002 | |
01-15700
|
McCoy v. Stewart
Former gang member's conviction for speaking to other gang members violated the First Amendment. |
Constitutional Law |
|
Mar. 4, 2002 | |
99CA2449
|
Weston v. Cassata
Failure of county government to adequately notify welfare recipients of sanctions violated due process. requirements. |
Constitutional Law |
|
Mar. 1, 2002 | |
00SC151
|
Animas Valley Sand and Gravel, Inc. v. Board of County Commissioners of the County of La Plata
Two-tiered inquiry in regulatory takings cases includes showing regulation renders land economically idle; proof of taking under fact-specific inquiry. |
Constitutional Law |
|
Mar. 1, 2002 | |
01SA210
|
People v. Koverman
Trial court incorrectly suppressed defendant's statement because record didn't support objectively reasonable belief that statement was coerced. |
Constitutional Law |
|
Feb. 28, 2002 | |
B153400
|
TBG Insurance Services Corp. v. Superior Court
Party does not have reasonable expectation of privacy in use of home computer which is provided by his employer. |
Constitutional Law |
|
Feb. 25, 2002 |