§Why CasetextPricing

AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION FOUNDATION OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA v. S.C. (CITY OF LOS ANGELES)

Amicus Curiae Brief of Jerry Hill

27 Cited authorities

  1. U.S. Dept. of Justice v. Reporters Committee

    489 U.S. 749 (1989)   Cited 1,918 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that disclosure of "[o]fficial information that sheds light on an agency's performance of its statutory duties falls squarely within [FOIA's] statutory purpose"

  2. Commodore Home Systems, Inc. v. Superior Court

    32 Cal.3d 211 (Cal. 1982)   Cited 194 times
    Holding that in a civil action under FEHA, all relief generally available in noncontractual actions, including punitive damages, may be obtained

  3. Times Mirror Co. v. Superior Court

    53 Cal.3d 1325 (Cal. 1991)   Cited 131 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding wholesale production of almost five years of governor's calendars and schedules not supported by identifiable public interest

  4. Edelstein v. City and County of San Francisco

    29 Cal.4th 164 (Cal. 2002)   Cited 78 times
    Finding question to be "of broad public interest and . . . likely to recur, if not in San Francisco elections, then in elections in other charter cities"

  5. CBS, Inc. v. Block

    42 Cal.3d 646 (Cal. 1986)   Cited 97 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Describing sheriff's discretion as "unfettered"

  6. 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’ "

  7. People v. Jimenez

    80 Cal.App.4th 286 (Cal. Ct. App. 2000)   Cited 45 times
    Rejecting contention § 667.6, subd. (d) did not apply to aggravated sexual assault of a child by forcible sodomy

  8. Silver v. Brown

    63 Cal.2d 841 (Cal. 1966)   Cited 84 times
    In Silver v. Brown, 63 Cal.2d 841, 48 Cal.Rptr. 609, 409 P.2d 689 (1966), the California Supreme Court, faced with a state reapportionment statute containing numerous ambiguities and technical errors, construed those defects in the plan according to its understanding of the legislative intent.

  9. Long Beach Police Officers Ass'n v. City of Long Beach

    203 Cal.App.4th 292 (Cal. Ct. App. 2012)   Cited 1 times
    Applying interpretative principles to determine whether officer's names were protected from disclosure by § 832.7 and finding they were not confidential

  10. People v. Superior Court (Arthur R.)

    199 Cal.App.3d 494 (Cal. Ct. App. 1988)   Cited 15 times

    Docket No. B030071. March 10, 1988. Page 495 COUNSEL Ira Reiner, District Attorney, Donald J. Kaplan and Daniel L. Bershin, Deputy District Attorneys, for Petitioner. No appearance for Respondent. Wilbur F. Littlefield, Public Defender, Alan Simon, Theodore Fasteau and Sue Robin Pollock, Deputy Public Defenders, for Real Party in Interest. OPINION WOODS, P.J. By petition for writ of mandate, the People seek review of a juvenile court order terminating dispositional jurisdiction over a minor. The

  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

  12. Section 8

    Cal. Const. art. I § 8   Cited 197 times
    Prohibiting race discrimination

  13. Section 6253 - Inspection of public records

    Cal. Gov. Code § 6253   Cited 178 times
    Providing a right of public access to records of state and local public agencies

  14. Section 13.82 - COMPREHENSIVE LAW ENFORCEMENT DATA

    Minn. Stat. § 13.82   Cited 7 times

    Subdivision 1.Application. This section shall apply to agencies which carry on a law enforcement function, including but not limited to municipal police departments, county sheriff departments, fire departments, the Bureau of Criminal Apprehension, the Minnesota State Patrol, the Board of Peace Officer Standards and Training, the Department of Commerce, and county human service agency client and provider fraud investigation, prevention, and control units operated or supervised by the Department of

  15. Section 2025.270 - Scheduling

    Cal. Code Civ. Proc. § 2025.270   Cited 7 times

    (a) An oral deposition shall be scheduled for a date at least 10 days after service of the deposition notice. (b) Notwithstanding subdivision (a), in an unlawful detainer action or other proceeding under Chapter 4 (commencing with Section 1159) of Title 3 of Part 3, an oral deposition shall be scheduled for a date at least five days after service of the deposition notice, but not later than five days before trial. (c) Notwithstanding subdivisions (a) and (b), if, as defined in Section 1985.3 or 1985

  16. Section 1798.29 - Notice of breach of security of computerized data system

    Cal. Civ. Code § 1798.29   Cited 3 times   9 Legal Analyses

    (a)Any agency that owns or licenses computerized data that includes personal information shall disclose any breach of the security of the system following discovery or notification of the breach in the security of the data to any resident of California (1) whose unencrypted personal information was, or is reasonably believed to have been, acquired by an unauthorized person, or, (2) whose encrypted personal information was, or is reasonably believed to have been, acquired by an unauthorized person

  17. Section 1798.90.54 - Civil action

    Cal. Civ. Code § 1798.90.54   Cited 1 times

    (a) In addition to any other sanctions, penalties, or remedies provided by law, an individual who has been harmed by a violation of this title, including, but not limited to, unauthorized access or use of ALPR information or a breach of security of an ALPR system, may bring a civil action in any court of competent jurisdiction against a person who knowingly caused the harm. (b) The court may award a combination of any one or more of the following: (1) Actual damages, but not less than liquidated

  18. Section 1798.90.51 - Duties of ALPR operator

    Cal. Civ. Code § 1798.90.51   Cited 1 times

    An ALPR operator shall do all of the following: (a) Maintain reasonable security procedures and practices, including operational, administrative, technical, and physical safeguards, to protect ALPR information from unauthorized access, destruction, use, modification, or disclosure. (b) (1) Implement a usage and privacy policy in order to ensure that the collection, use, maintenance, sharing, and dissemination of ALPR information is consistent with respect for individuals' privacy and civil liberties

  19. Section 1798.90.52 - Record of access; use of information

    Cal. Civ. Code § 1798.90.52   Cited 1 times

    If an ALPR operator accesses or provides access to ALPR information, the ALPR operator shall do both of the following: (a) Maintain a record of that access. At a minimum, the record shall include all of the following: (1) The date and time the information is accessed. (2) The license plate number or other data elements used to query the ALPR system. (3) The username of the person who accesses the information, and, as applicable, the organization or entity with whom the person is affiliated. (4) The

  20. Section 41-6a-2001 - Title

    Utah Code § 41-6a-2001

    This part is known as the "Automatic License Plate Reader System Act." Utah Code § 41-6a-2001 Added by Chapter 447, 2013 General Session ,§ 1, eff. 5/14/2013.

  21. Rule 8.520 - Briefs by parties and amici curiae; judicial notice

    Cal. R. 8.520   Cited 3,160 times

    (a)Parties' briefs; time to file (1) Within 30 days after the Supreme Court files the order of review, the petitioner must serve and file in that court either an opening brief on the merits or the brief it filed in the Court of Appeal. (2) Within 30 days after the petitioner files its brief or the time to do so expires, the opposing party must serve and file either an answer brief on the merits or the brief it filed in the Court of Appeal. (3) The petitioner may file a reply brief on the merits or

  22. Rule 8.60 - Extending time

    Cal. R. 8.60   Cited 46 times

    (a)Computing time The Code of Civil Procedure governs computing and extending the time to do any act required or permitted under these rules. (b)Extending time Except as these rules provide otherwise, for good cause or on an exceptional showing of good cause, when required by these rules the Chief Justice or presiding justice may extend the time to do any act required or permitted under these rules. (Subd (b) amended effective January 1, 2023; previously amended effective January 1, 2007.) (c) Application

  23. Rule 8.504 - Form and contents of petition, answer, and reply

    Cal. R. 8.504   Cited 21 times

    (a)In general Except as provided in this rule, a petition for review, answer, and reply must comply with the relevant provisions of rule 8.204. (Subd (a) amended effective January 1, 2007.) (b) Contents of a petition (1) The body of the petition must begin with a concise, nonargumentative statement of the issues presented for review, framing them in terms of the facts of the case but without unnecessary detail. (2) The petition must explain how the case presents a ground for review under rule 8.500(b)