CSAC sponsors a Litigation Coordination Program that is
administered by the County Counsels’ Association. The program is
directed by the Association’s Litigation Overview Committee,
consisting of county counsels representing all areas of the
state, in conjunction with a litigator coordinator with offices
in Sacramento.
The program monitors litigation of concern to counties statewide,
coordinates the defense of major multi-county litigation,
provides amicus (friend of the court) support where appropriate
and disseminates current information to county counsels in the
form of litigation alerts and updates on cases involving public
law issues.
For more information, contact Jennifer Henning, Executive
Director, County Counsels’ Association of California.
Following is a list of recent briefs that have been filed on
behalf of the Ligitation Coordination Program.
The United States Supreme Court will be considering this case out
of Los Angeles County that raises the question of whether a
police shooting in which the police acted reasonably can
nevertheless violate the Fourth Amendment if the officers engaged
in behavior that the Court of Appeals described as
provoking. CSAC amicus brief, drafted by Daniel Collins at
Munger Tolles & Olsen LLP in Los Angeles, argues that the Ninth
Circuit’s provocation rule conflicts with existing Supreme Court
cases and should be overturned.
CSAC is asking the California Supreme Court to review this
case in which the Sixth Appellate District concluded that the
city had an obligation to meet and consult before placing a
measure before the voters that would repeal interest arbitration
procedures in the City Charter for police and firefighter
employees. The letter supporting review was drafted by
Brandon Halter at Meyers Nave in Oakland.
In the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, CSAC argues that counties
are not liable for impounding a vehicle for 30 days if the
vehicle was lawfully seized when the owner was driving without a
valid license under Vehicle Code section 14602.6. CSAC’s
brief was drafted by San Diego Senior Deputy County Counsel
Morris Hill.
The California Government Claims Act generally requires claims to
be filed with a public entity before a lawsuit can be filed
against the entity. The State Legislature can exempt
certain types of claims from that requirement, but local agencies
can adopt their own policies requiring claims even if the State
exempts them. This case tests the limits of that
process. CSAC’s amicus brief highlights the importance of
the claims process and urges against limits on a local agency’s
ability to require claims. The brief was drafted by CSAC’s
Litigation Counsel Jennifer Hennin
CSAC is urging the United States Supreme Court to review a case
out of the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals upholding Department of
Interior regulations related to taking tribal land into
trust. The Department’s regulations chip away at the
Carcieri v. Salazar opinion, in which the Court held that the
Secretary of Interior’s authority to take land into trust on
behalf of “persons of Indian descent who are members of any
recognized Indian tribe now under Federal jurisdiction”
unambiguously refers to a tribe “under federal jurisdiction” on
June 1, 1934, rather than a tribe “under federal jurisdiction” at
the time the Secretary sought to take the land into trust.
The regulations at issue say that “recognition” of a tribe
(unlike jurisdiction) need not have necessarily existed in 1934,
but that subsequent “recognition” is sufficient. CSAC’s
amicus brief was drafted by Christopher Skinnell at Nielsen
Merksamer Parrinello Gross & Leoni LLP in San Rafael.
This case raises the issue of whether a water rate increase,
properly adopted under the majority protest procedures in Prop.
218, is subject to referendum. CSAC’s amicus brief takes
the position that fees that fund the operation of local
government are exempt from the referendum process, and subjecting
property-related fees to referendum is inconsistent with Prop.
218. The brief was drafted by Daniel Hentschke, former
General Counsel to the San Diego County Water Authority, and
Kelly Salt at Best Best & Krieger in San Diego.
CSAC has filed an amicus brief in the California Supreme Court
urging the Court to prohibit the use of taxpayer standing to
bring lawsuits to enforce criminal laws. The brief urges
the longstanding rule against civil enforcement of criminal laws,
leaving that task to the expertise of prosecutors. CSAC’s
brief was drafted by Leonard Aslanian at Colantuono, Highsmith &
Whatley, PC in Pasadena.
CSAC has filed an amicus brief in the Bankruptcy Appellate Court
arguing that once the right of redemption has closed in a
property tax foreclosure sale, the property is no longer part of
the estate, and if the former property owner thereafter files for
bankruptcy, the property is not protected by bankruptcy
proceedings. CSAC’s brief was drafted by Los Angeles Senior
Deputy County Counsel Richard Girgado and Barry Glaser of
Steckbauer Weinhart Jaffe LLP in Los Angeles.
This case addresses the application of recreational trail
immunity to a trail that circles around a golf course.
CSAC’s brief argues that the immunity is absolute, and applies to
a trail that runs adjacent to a fenced-in golf course. The
brief was drafted by Lee Roistacher of Daley & Heft LLP in Solana
Beach.
This case poses the question of whether local land use authority
over the location of retail firearms sales is preempted by the
Second Amendment. CSAC has urged rehearing of federal Ninth
Circuit decision that constitutionalizes the location of gun
sales. CSAC’s brief, which focuses on traditional standards
of review of local land use authority, was drafted by T. Peter
Pierce at Richards, Watson & Gershon in Los Angeles.
CSAC has filed a brief in support of Los Angeles County’s
petition for rehearing in the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in
this case addressing the application of immunity against
malicious prosecution claims. CSAC’s brief was drafted by
Peter Keith in the San Francisco City Attorney’s Office.
The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeal has determined that under the
Fair Labor Standards Act, cash payments made to employees in lieu
of health benefits must be included in the hourly “regular rate”
used to compensate employees for overtime hours worked.
CSAC has filed a brief in support of the city’s petition for
rehearing en banc. CSAC’s brief was drafted by Art
Hartinger at Renne Sloan Holtzman Sakai LLP in Berkeley.
CSAC has filed a brief in the Sixth District Court of Appeal
arguing that before a plaintiff files litigation with alleged
grievances under the Porter Cologne Act, the plaintiff must
exhaust administrative remedies before the Regional Water
Resources Control Board. CSAC’s brief was prepared by
Theresa Dunham at Somach, Simmons, Dunn in Sacramento.
CSAC has filed a letter support Kern County’s petition for
California Supreme Court review in this case, which raises the
question of what options are available to a Board of Supervisors
once an ordinance is repealed due to a referendum. CSAC’s
letter argues that counties have substantial latitude in
responding to referenda, including the ability to enact
alternative legislation. The letter was drafted by Tehama
County Counsel Arthur J. Wylene.
CSAC is asking the California Supreme Court to review a case
addressing the Government Claims Act filing requirements.
The issue in the case is how to apply an amendment to the Claims
Act authorizing claims to be filed under the sexual abuse delayed
discovery statutes. CSAC’s letter to the Court urges the
Court to affirm an earlier opinion that the Claims Act is more
than merely a statute of limitations provisions. The letter
was drafted by CSAC’s Litigation Counsel Jennifer Henning.
CSAC has filed a brief in the California Supreme Court urging the
Court to adopt a standard of review that provides deference to
local agencies in interpreting the meaning of terms within their
own general plans. The brief was drafted by Tyson Sohagi at
the Sohagi Law Group in Los Angeles.
The Public Employment Relations Board (PERB) determined that when
a public employer has a legitimate reason to object to an
employee representative in disciplinary interviews (in this case,
a practice of having Deputy District Attorneys representing
Deputy Public Defenders in hearings creating conflicts in
attorney obligations), the alternative is not using a different
representative. Rather, the employer’s option is not to
conduct the interview. The county sought review in the Court
of Appeal, but the court declined to consider the matter in a
summary order. The county is
The Supreme Court will consider whether photos of license plates
taken by automated license plate readers placed at intersections
are subject to disclosure under the Public Records Act.
CSAC’s brief on the subject was drafted by Michael Cobden at
Colantuono, Highsmith & Whatley in Grass Valley.
Does the Public Records Act authorize use of full-blown discovery
under the Civil Discovery Act when a plaintiff is attempting to
show that a record was wrongfully withheld in response to a
Public Records Act request? CSAC’s amicus brief outlining
the applicable statutes for judicial review of a decision to
withhold records was prepared by Rebecca Andrews at Best Best &
Krieger in San Diego.
The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals is considering the viability
of the so-called “conduit theory” of liability under the Clean
Water Act—that unconfined groundwater can act as a point source
if it conveys pollutants from a point source into waters of the
United States. CSAC’s brief arguing that the conduit theory
is not supported by the text of the Clean Water Act was drafted
by Shawn Haggerty at Best Best & Krieger in San Diego.
