Legal Opinion · Concurrence

Connecticut Indemnity Co. v. Superior Court

California Supreme Court

Decided July 24, 2000No. S065841Published

1Concurrence

KENNARD, J., Concurring.

The majority holds that under the facts established in this case, a city council acted within its legislative authority when it issued subpoenas to insurance companies requiring them to disclose information about the liability insurance coverage of individuals and businesses that were potentially responsible for local groundwater pollution. I agree.

The majority identifies three requirements for a valid legislative subpoena: (1) the subpoena has been authorized by ordinance or similar enactment; (2) the information sought is pertinent to a legislative investigation; and…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. United States v. GaudinSupreme Court of the United States · 1995
  2. Sinclair v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1929
  3. Superior Insurance v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1951
  4. Irvington-Moore, Inc. v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1993
  5. Griffith v. State Farm Mutual Automobile InsuranceCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1991

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API