Caldecott v. Superior Court, No. G051917 (D4d3 Dec. 18, 2015)
This is mostly a Public Records Act case, but it does make an interesting point about civil procedure. It also provides a useful tactical option. Plaintiff got some hot docs in discovery. He wants to publicly disclose them to blow the whistle on defendant, a school board. But he can’t because there’s a protective order limiting their use to the litigation. So he serves a PRA demand on the District, in order to obtain the docs outside of discovery. The court here holds that’s fine. The identity of the requester or his motives has no bearing on a PRA request. Either the docs are subject to an exemption or they aren’t. That a requester might intend to publicly disseminate the documents is not a legitimate reason to refuse to produce them. Indeed, that is the whole point of the PRA.
Writ granted.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
The Jurisprudence of Signification
Wood v. Superior Court , No. A168463 (D1d2 Mar. 14, 2024). Yes. You can change your legal name to Candi Bimbo Doll if you want to. See Cod...
-
Pollock v. Superior Court , No. B321229 (D2d1 Jul. 31, 2023) Back in 2019, the Legislature amended Code of Civil Procedure § 2031.280 to inc...
-
RSB Vineyards, LLC v. Orsi , No. A143781 (D1d3 Sept. 29, 2017) In this real estate warranty case, the court affirms a summary judgment in ...
No comments:
Post a Comment