Case # | Name | Category | Court | Judge | Published |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
B324717
|
Doe v. The Regents of the University of California
Preliminary injunction was properly denied where former professors sought to prevent disclosure of disciplinary information from university's files that was reliable. |
Public Records Act |
|
E. Grimes | Jun. 11, 2024 |
A165888
|
First Amendment Coalition v. Superior Court (Rob Bonta)
Nonconfidential officer-related records subject to disclosure under Penal Code Section 832.7(b) may not be withheld by the Department of Justice under the Government Code, Penal Code, or Unemployment Insurance Code. |
Public Records Act |
|
C. Fujisaki | Jan. 2, 2024 |
D082048
|
Castanares v. Superior Court (City of Chula Vista)
Trial court erred in determining, as a matter of law, that all video footage from police drone program was exempt from Public Records Act requests as "records of investigations." |
Public Records Act |
|
R. Huffman | Dec. 29, 2023 |
H049554
|
Modification: City of Gilroy v. Superior Court (Law Foundation of Silicon Valley)
Nonprofit Law Foundation's petition for writ of mandate against Gilroy under the California Public Records Act was denied because the City produce all nonexempt police bodycam footage. |
Public Records Act |
|
M. Greenwood | Nov. 22, 2023 |
H049552
|
City of Gilroy v. Superior Court (Law Foundation of Silicon Valley)
Nonprofit Law Foundation's petition for writ of mandate against Gilroy under the California Public Records Act was denied because the City produce all nonexempt police bodycam footage. |
Public Records Act |
|
M. Greenwood | Oct. 24, 2023 |
H050285
|
County of San Benito v. Superior Court (Western Resources Legal Center)
County was not required to produce explanatory material in response to Public Records Act requests. |
Public Records Act |
|
C. Lie | Oct. 13, 2023 |
A165187
|
Bondgraham v. Superior Court (City of Oakland)
Oakland's redaction of information regarding a police sex scandal with an underaged girl was improper because it failed to identify a valid redaction provision. |
Public Records Act |
|
J. Richman | Sep. 27, 2023 |
D080133
|
Valenti v. City of San Diego
Nonprevailing plaintiff's request for Public Records Act attorney fees was properly denied because he failed to establish required causal connection between his lawsuit and obtaining the records. |
Public Records Act |
|
T. Do | Aug. 9, 2023 |
A164947
|
Modification: Edais v. Superior Court (Foucrault)
San Mateo Coroner's Office was required to disclose its investigation report of a police officer's suicide since the public's interest in the report far outweighed the deceased officer's privacy interest. |
Public Records Act |
|
A. Tucher | Feb. 7, 2023 |
A164947
|
Modification: Edais v. Superior Court
San Mateo Coroner's Office was required to disclose its investigation report of a police officer's suicide since the public's interest in the report far outweighed the deceased officer's privacy interest. |
Public Records Act |
|
Jan. 27, 2023 | |
G060856
|
Iloh v. The Regents of the University of California
The public's interest in communications between a public university and a research professor regarding published articles outweighed a possible chilling effect on academic freedom. |
Public Records Act |
|
T. Goethals | Jan. 18, 2023 |
A164947
|
Edais v. Superior Court
San Mateo Coroner's Office was required to disclose its investigation report of a police officer's suicide since the public's interest in the report far outweighed the deceased officer's privacy interest. |
Public Records Act |
|
A. Tucher | Jan. 18, 2023 |
C096273
|
Freedom Foundation v. Superior Court (Department of Human Resources)
Records regarding labor units and state employees were exempt from disclosure and not reasonably segregable because the requested information would reveal research and evaluations conducted pursuant to the Dills Act. |
Public Records Act |
|
J. Renner | Jan. 4, 2023 |
A162887
|
Essick v. County of Sonoma (Unredacted)
Because the Board of Supervisors was not the county sheriff's employer, he was not entitled to *Pitchess* protections when the newspaper requested documents pertaining to a harassment investigation. |
Public Records Act |
|
J. Streeter | Aug. 1, 2022 |
A162842
|
Modification: Rittiman v. Public Utilities Commission
The Governor's correspondence exemption under the Public Records Act applies to all correspondence of and to the Governor and his staff, not just those from private parties. |
Public Records Act |
|
K. Banke | Jul. 15, 2022 |
F081049
|
Wyatt v. Kern High School
Records relating to internal affairs investigation against a peace officer were not subject to disclosure under Penal Code Section 832.7 because the officer was not provided an opportunity to appeal the findings. |
Public Records Act |
|
C. Poochigian | Jul. 13, 2022 |
A162887
|
Essick v. County of Sonoma
Report on harassment by an elected sheriff was not protected as confidential under the California Public Records Act because the county board of supervisors was not his employer. |
Public Records Act |
|
J. Streeter | Jul. 1, 2022 |
A162842
|
Rittiman v. Public Utilities Commission
The Governor's correspondence exemption under the Public Records Act applies to all correspondence of and to the Governor and his staff, not just those from private parties. |
Public Records Act |
|
K. Banke | Jun. 20, 2022 |
C093020
|
Community Action Agency of Butte County v. Superior Court of Butte County
Right to access any public agency record under the California Public Records Act applies to a nonprofit only in the exceptional circumstance that it operates as a local public entity. |
Public Records Act |
|
V. Raye | Jun. 1, 2022 |
C091337
|
Getz v. Superior Court (County of El Dorado)
A Public Records Act request was not unduly burdensome because the request specified particular email addresses and so the emails, although numerous, would be easy to locate. |
Public Records Act |
|
V. Raye | Dec. 14, 2021 |
D078415
|
Modification: Voice of San Diego v. Superior Court (County of San Diego)
Public interest in not disclosing exact location of COVID-19 outbreaks outweighed public interest in disclosure. |
Public Records Act |
|
J. Irion | Jul. 28, 2021 |
D078415
|
Voice of San Diego v. Superior Court (County of San Diego)
Public interest in not disclosing exact location of COVID-19 outbreaks outweighed public interest in disclosure. |
Public Records Act |
|
J. Irion | Jul. 20, 2021 |
C080685
|
Stevenson v. City of Sacramento
Trial court properly ordered appellants to post an undertaking under Code of Civil Procedure Section 529 as a condition to obtaining their Public Records Act injunction. |
Public Records Act |
|
C. Blease | Oct. 8, 2020 |
D076605
|
Modification: Golden Door Properties, LLC v. Superior Court (County of San Diego)
County's emails were official records under Public Resources Code Section 21167.6 and should not have been destroyed because they were subject to discovery under the Public Records Act. |
Public Records Act |
|
Aug. 27, 2020 | |
D076605
|
Golden Door Properties, LLC v. Superior Court (County of San Diego)
County's emails were official records under Public Resources Code Section 21167.6 and should not have been destroyed because they were subject to discovery under the Public Records Act. |
Public Records Act |
|
J. McConnell | Aug. 3, 2020 |
B285391
|
Anderson-Barker v. Superior Court
Under California Public Records Act, petitioner had to show that the City had a right to control the data in question; thus, a right to access the data was insufficient. |
Public Records Act |
|
L. Zelon | Jan. 24, 2019 |
E068163
|
Associated Chino Teachers v. Chino Valley Unified School Dist.
Records of investigation into high school volleyball coach's 'yelling and belittling' of athletes exempt from disclosure under CPRA, as privacy interests of coach outweigh 'public's minimal interest in the matter.' |
Public Records Act |
|
A. McKinster | Dec. 24, 2018 |
A150061
|
Sander v. State Bar of California
Under the California Public Records Act, the State Bar was not required to create new records by changing the substantive content of an existing record to satisfy a request for information. |
Public Records Act |
|
P. Siggins | Aug. 27, 2018 |
C083956
|
National Conference of Black Mayors v. Chico Community Publishing, Inc.
Trial court properly denied an attorney fees motion under Public Records Act since party did not withhold requested documents. |
Public Records Act |
|
R. Robie | Jul. 27, 2018 |
16-35414
|
A Better Way for BPA v. U.S. Doe Bonneville Power Admin.
Dismissal of Freedom of Information Act action for lack of standing for failure to adequately identify FOIA requester reversed where request form clearly indicates that nonprofit organization is requester. |
Public Records Act |
|
M. McKeown | May 30, 2018 |