For reprint rights or to purchase a copy of your Daily Journal photo, email Jeremy_Ellis@dailyjournal.com for prices or call 213-229-5424.

To buy more copies, call 866-531-1492 or email subscribe@dailyjournal.com
This is the property of the Daily Journal Corporation and fully protected by copyright. It is made available only to Daily Journal subscribers for personal or collaborative purposes and may not be distributed, reproduced, modified, stored or transferred without written permission. Please click "Reprint" to order presentation-ready copies to distribute to clients or use in commercial marketing materials or for permission to post on a website. and copyright (showing year of publication) at the bottom.
Subscribe to the Daily Journal for access to Daily Appellate Reports, Verdicts, Judicial Profiles and more...
Daily appellate reports
Enewsletter Sign-up
    Filter by date
     to 
    Search by Case Name
    Search by Judge
    Search by Case Number
    Search by DJ Citation Number
    Search by Category
    Search by Court
Name Category Published
City of Vallejo v. Superior Court (ACLU of Northern California)
Records relating to an investigation of officers' shootings were disclosable to a Public Records Act request and not exempt under the *Pitchess* statutes. 		Public Records Act 1DCA/1 Jul. 1, 2025
Modification: Sacramento Television Stations Inc. v. Superior Court (City of Roseville)
Generalized concerns about victim trauma and fair-trial publicity were insufficient to find that "active investigation" exemption to the California Public Records Act absolved police of their duty to release bodycam footage. 		Public Records Act 3DCA Jun. 27, 2025
Sacramento Television Stations Inc. v. Superior Court (City of Roseville)
Generalized concerns about victim trauma and fair-trial publicity were insufficient to find that "active investigation" exemption to the California Public Records Act absolved police of their duty to release bodycam footage. 		Public Records Act 3DCA Jun. 11, 2025
Di Lauro v. City of Burbank
Although class claims alleged were barred, demurrer without leave to amend was not appropriate where complaint alleged facts constituting an individual cause of action under the California Public Records Act. 		Public Records Act 2DCA/5 Apr. 24, 2025
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 2DCA/8 Jun. 11, 2024
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 1DCA/3 Jan. 2, 2024
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 4DCA/1 Dec. 29, 2023
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 6DCA Nov. 22, 2023
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 6DCA Oct. 24, 2023
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 6DCA Oct. 13, 2023
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 1DCA/2 Sep. 27, 2023
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 4DCA/1 Aug. 9, 2023
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 1DCA/3 Feb. 7, 2023
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 1DCA/3 Jan. 27, 2023
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 4DCA/3 Jan. 18, 2023
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 1DCA/3 Jan. 18, 2023
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 2DCA/3 Jan. 4, 2023
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 1DCA/4 Aug. 1, 2022
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 1DCA/1 Jul. 15, 2022
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 5DCA Jul. 13, 2022
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 1DCA/4 Jul. 1, 2022
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 1DCA/1 Jun. 20, 2022
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 3DCA Jun. 1, 2022
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 3DCA Dec. 14, 2021
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 4DCA/1 Jul. 28, 2021
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 4DCA/1 Jul. 20, 2021
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 3DCA Oct. 8, 2020
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 4DCA/1 Aug. 27, 2020
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 4DCA/1 Aug. 3, 2020
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 2DCA/7 Jan. 24, 2019
By using our website, you agree to our use of cookies in accordance with our cookie policy. You can learn more about how we use cookies by reviewing our Privacy Policy here.