Contact

Send us a Message
Contact Us
Contact
Northern California

2261 Lava Ridge Court
Roseville, CA 95661
P: 916.780.9009
F: 916.780.9050
E: norcalinfo@colehuber.com

Southern California

3401 Centrelake Drive, Suite 670
Ontario, CA 91761
P: 909.230.4209
F: 909.937.2034
E: socalinfo@colehuber.com

Cota Cole & Huber Logo White

Contact

California Municipal Law Blog
category:
Recent Court Decisions

Court Rules Enforcement of “Anti-Camping” Ordinance is Unconstitutional When Homeless Persons Lack Shelter

by on September 24, 2018

posted in Code Enforcement, Recent Court Decisions,

“Anti-camping” and related “sit-lie” ordinances cannot be enforced against homeless persons who have no access to overnight shelter.  As the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals held on September 4, enforcement under such circumstances effectively criminalizes the status of being homeless, violating the Eighth Amendment’s prohibition on cruel and unusual punishment.  The Court’s decision, in Martin v. City of Boise, will make it difficult for local agencies to enforce their “anti-camping” ordinances to the extent they did previously.  ... Continue Reading

Facebook
Google+
https://colehuber.com/category/recent-court-decisions">
Twitter
LinkedIn

tags: Anti-camping ordinances, Homelessness, Martin v. City of Boise, Sit-lie ordinances,

California Supreme Court Rules in Favor of Police in a Pursuit Accident Case

by on August 15, 2018

posted in Law Enforcement, Recent Court Decisions,

The California Supreme Court issued a very favorable ruling in favor of police agencies on August 13, 2018. In an unanimous opinion, the Court ruled that a police department that requires ALL of the officers to certify that they have read and understood the vehicle-pursuit policy can claim immunity even if all its members failed to sign. Ramirez v. City of Gardena (2018) S244549.  ... Continue Reading

Facebook
Google+
https://colehuber.com/category/recent-court-decisions">
Twitter
LinkedIn

tags: Ramirez v. City of Gardena, Vehicle Pursuit,

Proposition 26 Does Not Impose A Fundamental Right To Vote On Limited Purpose Assessments

by on July 8, 2018

posted in Propositions 13/26/218, Recent Court Decisions, Uncategorised,

The electorate does not have a fundamental right to vote on an assessment levied upon a specific group of taxpayers for a limited (non-general governmental) purpose, a California Appellate court found in Reid et al. v. City of San Diego et al.  In Reid, plaintiffs challenged a two percent assessment levied on lodging businesses operating in the City with 70 or more sleeping rooms by the City of San Diego Tourism Marketing District (TMD) to fund coordinated joint marketing and promotional activities for tourism development as violative of Proposition 26 and the Equal Protection Clause, among ... Continue Reading

Facebook
Google+
https://colehuber.com/category/recent-court-decisions">
Twitter
LinkedIn

tags: Proposition 26, tourism marketing district,

Paid Administrative Leave Now Considered Adverse Employment Action

by on June 14, 2018

posted in Employment Law, Recent Court Decisions,

Paid administrative leave may be considered an adverse employment action, a California Appellate court found in Whitehall v. Cty. of San Bernardino.  In Whitehall, the plaintiff was employed by San Bernardino County Children and Family Services (CFS) and was assigned to investigate a case in which a nine-month old baby died under suspicious circumstances. Plaintiff obtained the police report which showed the deceased child and four other children were living uninhabitable conditions. The report contained photographs of children with ligature and burn marks. However, the CFS deputy director instructed ... Continue Reading

Facebook
Google+
https://colehuber.com/category/recent-court-decisions">
Twitter
LinkedIn

tags: Administrative Leave, Adverse Employment Action, Whistleblower Laws,

Court Confirms Heads of Government Agencies Are Generally Not Subject to Deposition

by on May 17, 2018

posted in Recent Court Decisions,

The First Appellate District recently issued a decision confirming that California law generally prohibits the deposition of a highly placed public officer absent a limited exception to that rule.  The two-pronged exception applies when: (1) the high-ranking official has personal knowledge relating to material issues in the lawsuit and (2) the deposing party demonstrates the information to be gained is not available from any other source.  The reasoning behind the general rule of prohibiting the depositions of high ranking officials is to prevent such proceedings from consuming an officials’ ... Continue Reading

Facebook
Google+
https://colehuber.com/category/recent-court-decisions">
Twitter
LinkedIn

tags: Contractors State Licensing Board, Deposition, Litigation,

Page 1 of 512345