Legal Opinion
County of Santa Clara v. Superior Court of Santa Clara County
California Court of Appeal
Decided February 17, 2009No. H031740PublishedCited by 28 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
MIHARA, Acting P. J.
These six writ petitions all raise the same issue. The question is whether, under the California Public Records Act (the CPRA; Gov. Code, § 6250 et seq.) and the California Supreme Court’s decision in Filarsky v. Superior Court (2002) 28 Cal.4th 419 [121 Cal.Rptr.2d 844, 49 P.3d 194] (Filarsky) interpreting the CPRA, real parties in interest Janice and Ronald Naymark are precluded from bringing an action under Code of Civil Procedure section 526a against petitioners. The superior court concluded that the CPRA and Filarsky do not preclude the Naymarks from bringing…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Brandt v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1985
- Blair v. PitchessCalifornia Supreme Court · 1971
- Pacific Legal Foundation v. California Coastal CommissionCalifornia Supreme Court · 1982
- Harman v. City and County of San FranciscoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1972
- Van Atta v. ScottCalifornia Supreme Court · 1980
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by28 opinions
- Regents of University v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2013
- Marken v. Santa Monica-Malibu Unified School DistrictCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2012
- Cal. Dui Lawyers Ass'n v. Cal. Dep't of Motor Vehicles, California Court of Appeal, 5th District2018
- City of Los Angeles v. Superior Court of Los Angeles CountyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2017
- Apple Inc. v. Superior Court of Santa Clara Cnty., California Court of Appeal, 5th District2017
23 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.