§Why CasetextPricing

SAN JOSE, CITY OF v. S.C. (SMITH) (To be called and continued to the December 2016 calendar.)

Real Party in Interest, Ted Smith, Reply to Answer to Petition for Review

12 Cited authorities

  1. City of Ontario v. Quon

    560 U.S. 746 (2010)   Cited 334 times   28 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the police department's warrantless search of a police officer's pager was reasonable because it was not excessive in scope and was motivated by a legitimate work-related purpose

  2. Hill v. Nat'l Collegiate Athletic Ass'n

    7 Cal.4th 1 (Cal. 1994)   Cited 642 times   12 Legal Analyses
    Holding that students' consent to drug tests as a condition of participating in athletics barred their privacy claims

  3. Int'l Fed'n of Prof'l & Tech. Eng'rs v. Superior Court

    42 Cal.4th 319 (Cal. 2007)   Cited 104 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Finding a "strong public interest in knowing how the government spends its money"

  4. Comm. on Peace Off. Stand. v. Superior Court

    42 Cal.4th 278 (Cal. 2007)   Cited 99 times
    Compiling cases concluding that police officers are public officials for purposes of defamation claims

  5. Bernardi v. County of Monterey

    167 Cal.App.4th 1379 (Cal. Ct. App. 2008)   Cited 81 times
    Upholding "modest" 1.25 multiplier for contingent risk and delay in obtaining payment, as well as unique issues

  6. O'Grady v. Superior Court

    139 Cal.App.4th 1423 (Cal. Ct. App. 2006)   Cited 81 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that an online news magazine constitutes a "periodical publication" under a law that was enacted before digital magazines

  7. Long Beach Police Officers Assn. v. City of Long Beach

    59 Cal.4th 59 (Cal. 2014)   Cited 30 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Rejecting the city's blanket refusal to release the names of police officers involved in on-duty shootings because a lieutenant's declaration that public disclosure could expose an officer and the officer's family to harassment or retaliatory violence was too vague and speculative when the city offered " ‘no evidence’ of a ‘specific safety concern regarding any particular officer’ "

  8. Regents of the Univ. of Cal. v. Superior Court of Cal.

    222 Cal.App.4th 383 (Cal. Ct. App. 2014)   Cited 21 times   2 Legal Analyses

    A138136 2014-01-14 The REGENTS OF the UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, Petitioner, v. The SUPERIOR COURT of Alameda County, Respondent; Reuters America LLC, Real Party in Interest. See 2 Witkin, Cal. Evidence (5th ed. 2012) Witnesses, § 293. Alameda County Superior Court, Hon. Evelio Grillo (Alameda County Super. Ct. No. RG12–613664) Kline See 2 Witkin, Cal. Evidence (5th ed. 2012) Witnesses, § 293. Alameda County Superior Court, Hon. Evelio Grillo (Alameda County Super. Ct. No. RG12–613664) Attorneys for

  9. Gray v. Faulkner

    148 F.R.D. 220 (Bankr. N.D. Ind. 1992)   Cited 48 times
    Requiring certification that responding party "have conducted a search for the information reasonably available to them through their agents, attorneys, or others subject to their control and have determined that the information requested either does not exist or that it has been produced."

  10. San Gabriel Tribune v. Superior Court

    143 Cal.App.3d 762 (Cal. Ct. App. 1983)   Cited 59 times
    In San Gabriel Tribune v. Superior Court, 143 Cal.App.3d 762, 192 Cal.Rptr. 415 (Cal.Ct.App. 1983), a newspaper sought disclosure of financial statements prepared in connection with a municipality's exclusive long-term waste-disposal contract with a garbage company.

  11. Section 3

    Cal. Const. art. I § 3   Cited 296 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Creating constitutional right of access to public agency records and calling for strict construction of statutes limiting such access