Petition for writ of mandate filed by "Birthers," plus Criminal & Arbitration Matters - California Case Law
California Case Law - The FindLaw California Supreme Court and Courts of Appeal Opinion Summaries Blog

Petition for writ of mandate filed by "Birthers," plus Criminal & Arbitration Matters

People v. Graves, B220129, involved a prosecution of a defendant for spousal battery on his wife and battery on is mother-in-law.  In reversing the trial court's dismissal of the case, the court remanded the matter as a sham trial does not trigger double jeopardy protection.  The court also held that the trial court erred by denying the People's request to trail within the statutory period provided for by section 1382.

Keys v. Bowen, C062321, involved a petition for writ of mandate filed by what have come to be known as "Birthers," against the Secretary of State, President Obama, Vice President Biden and the Electors.  In affirming the trial court's judgment sustaining defendants' demurrers without leave to amend, the court held that the plaintiffs have failed to meet their burden of demonstrating that the trial court erred in sustaining the Elector's demurrer on the ground that the petition failed to state a cause of action.  The court also held that the Secretary of State does not have a duty to investigate and determine whether a presidential candidate meets eligibility requirements of the United States Constitution.

City of Richmond, A127492, concerned a challenge to a trial court's judgment vacating an arbitration award holding that an arbitrator violated public policy against sexual harassment in the workplace when ordering an employee reinstated upon concluding that the sexual harassment charge was time-barred.  In reversing and remanding, the court held that the arbitral finality is the general rule and the public policy exception permitting courts to vacate an arbitration award arises in only limited and exceptional circumstances.  Furthermore, while there is a strong policy against workplace harassment, the city has not established that public policy precludes arbitral enforcement of a reasonable limitation period contained in a collective bargaining agreement barring stale claims of misconduct.

Related Link: