SCOCAblog

20 Mar, 2015

Righting a Wrong: SCOCA’s decision to admit Hong Yen Chang – 125 years after he applied

Earlier this week, the California Supreme Court issued an extraordinary order admitting to practice a Chinese-American lawyer named Hong Yen Chang. It is extraordinary because Mr. Chang first applied for admission 125 years ago. His application was originally denied because he was “a person of Mongolian nativity.” It was posthumously granted by the court this week. Tracing the sordid history of discrimination against Chinese immigrants in California, and noting that anti-Chinese animus was “a major impetus for the California Constitutional Convention of 1879” and the driving force behind the federal Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882, the court set out a dismaying string of...

A look forward to arguments in Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association v. Bowen

Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Ass'n v. Bowen

18 Mar, 2015

A look forward to arguments in Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association v. Bowen

by Stephen Duvernay

Later this year the Supreme Court of California will hear arguments in Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association v. Bowen, a dispute over the scope of the legislature’s power to place so-called “advisory measures” on the ballot for voter consideration. This case poses a number of important questions bearing on separation of powers under the California Constitution, specifically, between the legislative power allocated to the legislature and that reserved for the citizens. Under the California Elections Code, advisory measures allow voters to “voice their opinions on substantive issues,” or to indicate approval or disapproval of the ballot proposal to the “sponsoring legislative...

Johnson v. Department of Justice

18 Mar, 2015

Johnson v. Department of Justice – an equal protection analysis

by Michael Willemsen

Under Penal Code section 290, all persons convicted of consensual oral copulation with a partner under 18 must register as a sex offender. In 2006, the California Supreme Court in People v. Hofsheier held 6-1 that the mandatory registration unconstitutionally denied the defendant the equal protection of the laws because a person convicted of consensual sexual intercourse with a partner under 18 (Penal Code section 261.5) would not be subject to mandatory registration. On January 29, 2015, however, Johnson v. Department of Justice overruled Hofsheier by a 5-2 vote and reinstated the mandatory registration requirement for those convicted of consensual...

People v. Buza

6 Mar, 2015

Review granted in People v. Buza – Whether California’s DNA collection law violates the U.S. or Cal. Constitution

by David Andreasen

On February 18, the California Supreme Court granted review in People v. Buza, in which the Court of Appeal held that a California law requiring the collection of DNA from every person arrested for a felony violates Article I, section 13 of the California Constitution. Already pending before SCOCA is People v. Lowe, in which another Court of Appeal decision reached the opposite conclusion: that California’s DNA collection scheme did not violate the Fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. The opinions in Lowe and Buza were both issued after earlier California decisions were vacated in the wake of the U.S....

South Coast Framing v. WCAB

3 Mar, 2015

A look at today’s argument in South Coast Framing v. WCAB

by Jason Knox

Today, the California Supreme Court is hearing arguments in South Coast Framing, Inc. v. Workers’ Compensation Appeals Board. In this case, the court is asked to consider both the standard and quantum of proof required to satisfy the proximate causation element of claims by the survivors of workers whose deaths are alleged to be the consequence of an otherwise non-fatal industrial injury. This decision is set against a system that provides benefits for workplace injuries and any subsequent injuries or death that result therefrom. While this system defines the requisite nexus between a workplace injury and a compensable consequence in...

Generic Drug Product Liability: An Emerging SCOCA Issue?

In re Cipro

2 Mar, 2015

Generic Drug Product Liability: An Emerging SCOCA Issue?

by Shane Smith

Even as the Supreme Court of California prepares to hear oral argument in In re Cipro Cases I & II (S198616) on March 3, 2015, another issue involving pharmaceutical science and regulatory law may be headed for consideration at 350 McAllister Street. The decision in Teva Pharms. USA, Inc. v. Superior Ct. (“Pikerie”) — which arguably broadened the scope of California product liability claims that may lie against generic drug manufacturers — dodged high court review when the U.S. Supreme Court denied certiorari on January 20, 2015. SCOCA had previously denied Teva’s petition for review on September 25, 2013. Superior...

Uncategorized

25 Feb, 2015

Seek “Top Court” Review?

by Myron Moskovitz

* This posting is an excerpt from the forthcoming 5th Edition of Myron Moskovitz’s book, Winning an Appeal. The Problem Most jurisdictions have two levels of appellate courts: an intermediate appellate court, and what I call the “Top Court.” In New York, the Top Court is called the Court of Appeals. In most other states, it is called the State Supreme Court. And, of course, the “Toppest Court of All” is the U.S. Supreme Court. If you lost in the intermediate appellate court, you can then ask the Top Court to hear your case via a petition—called a “petition for certiorari,”...

Richey v. AutoNation

17 Feb, 2015

Opinion Analysis: Richey v. AutoNation

by Scott Dodson

On January 29, 2015, a unanimous California Supreme Court issued its opinion in Richey v. AutoNation, Inc., an important clarification on when a court can overturn an arbitration award. Facts Plaintiff Richey worked as an at-will employee for defendant Power Toyota. His employment terms included acceptance of (1) a company policy that prohibited outside work while on approved medical leave and (2) an agreement to resolve any employment dispute through arbitration. The arbitration agreement provided that any decision would be “final and binding.” The agreement did not expressly provide that courts could review any arbitration award for legal error. Richey...

Johnson v. Department of Justice – Equal Protection and Mandatory Registration for Sex Offenders

Johnson v. Department of Justice / Uncategorized

13 Feb, 2015

Johnson v. Department of Justice – Equal Protection and Mandatory Registration for Sex Offenders

by David Andreasen

This is the first of two SCOCAblog posts on the recent opinion of Johnson v. Department of Justice. Keep a look out for a second posting with further analysis early next week. Summary: California’s sex offender registration scheme, Penal Code section 290 et seq., treats defendants convicted of engaging in non-forcible oral sex with a minor differently than those who engage in vaginal sex with a minor. Most pertinent to this case, the statutes give judges discretion whether or not to impose registration on an adult who has non-forcible vaginal sex with a 16-year-old, but lifetime registration is mandatory for an...

Submit Your Questions for Justice Cuéllar

Updates

12 Feb, 2015

Submit Your Questions for Justice Cuéllar

by Hastings Law Journal

Next Wednesday, February 18, La Raza is hosting a Q&A with newly-appointed California Supreme Court Justice Mariano-Florentino Cuéllar. If you have any questions you’d like to submit, email them to SCOCAblog@hastingslawjournal.org — the moderator may have time to bring them up! The first immigrant Latino appointed to the highest court in California will make a special appearance at UC Hastings to speak about his journey and experiences as an attorney, professor, and now a Supreme Court justice. UC Hastings Professor Leo Martinez will lead the Q&A session. Date: February 18, 2014 Time: 3:30pm – 4:30pm Where: Alumni Reception Center (ARC),...