California Case Law - The FindLaw California Supreme Court and Courts of Appeal Opinion Summaries Blog

Recently in Civil Rights Law Category

Los Angeles City Attorney Mike Feuer has filed a lawsuit against The Weather Channel app due to the company's bait-and-switch geolocation policy and is hoping to send a message to other developers out there that plan to profit off mining their users' data.

That message: Be honest and upfront with app users about data-privacy. This case alleges unfair business practices under California law for misleading consumers when it came to the app's user data-privacy policy. When starting up, the app creates a popup advising users to share their location and that it will be used for specific things, none of which include sharing with third parties, or being used for advertising, or being monitored constantly.

Court Nixes Lawsuit Challenging California Assisted Suicide

Doctors may continue to prescribe life-ending drugs to terminally ill patients who request them in California, according to a state appeals court.

The Fourth District Court of Appeals kept the state's assisted-suicide law alive after a lower court said the law was unconstitutional. The appeals court said the plaintiffs did not have standing to challenge the law because they did not show any harm to themselves.

However, the appeals panel also remanded the case for further consideration. There will be more on the so-called "right-to-die."

There is very little doubt that the University of California values diversity at all its campuses statewide, however due to the state's ban on affirmative action, the universities' admissions systems have been race-neutral.

However, a UCLA professor who's been studying the data has filed a lawsuit because he has been refused updated data, and because he believes that schools have fell back into having admissions policies basically implementing affirmative action. Given the recentness of the Harvard race-based admissions trial, this recent lawsuit against the UC Regents is garnering a lot of attention.

California Judge Allows Girl to Take Cannabis Medicine to School

Brooke Adams is not the first kid to take cannabis to school.

But she is the first 5-year-old in California to get a court order allowing her to do it. Her parents said she needs her cannabis-infused medicine to control seizures.

They tried to get permission the mellow way -- working with school and state officials. But when that didn't work, they did it the hard way -- they sued.

When it comes to states experimenting with expansive and progressive environmental laws, no other state is as environmentally conscious and curious as California.

What's more is that Californians' efforts have made a significant impact throughout the country. It has gotten to the point where California basically sets the national standards, since corporate entities that wish to do business in California simply find it more cost effective to follow California's environmental laws than to create separate product lines for California and the rest of the country.

Below, you can read about three important California environmental laws that set the standard for other states to follow.

No matter what you think of Prop 65, the voters of California passed it. That means that when a company sells or exposes California consumers to something known to the state of California to be a cancer or birth defect causing agent, those companies have to warn consumers.

Sounds like a good law for consumers, and a relatively difficult and burdensome one for businesses. But recently, this mainstay of California consumer protection has been in the national spotlight due to the fact that a judge ruled a few months back that coffee companies are required to provide the prop 65 warnings for coffee because coffee contains one of the California "known cancer causing ingredients." This caused the entire coffee drinking (and caffeine addicted) world to recoil in disbelief. In fact, studies were done to show that coffee is actually healthy and prevents some cancers or something, and state lawmakers almost immediately moved to overrule the court.

The Bay Area Rapid Transit, known as BART, has come under intense scrutiny over the last decade due to increasing crime as well as the failures of the transit system's own police force.

Most recently, in late July, 18-year old Nia Wilson was stabbed to death, while standing on a BART platform with her sister, just waiting for a train. Though the assailant was caught the next day thanks to security camera footage, and is being prosecuted, the family is planning a lawsuit against BART due to Nia's murder.

Poor Litigants Have Right to Free Court Reporter in California

Poor Barry Jameson, representing himself in a civil trial, was stuck between a rock and a hard place.

For budget reasons, the San Diego Superior Court did not provide a court reporter and Jameson couldn't afford one either. After the judge dismissed his case, he appealed but had no record to offer the reviewing court.

In Jameson v. Desta, the California Supreme Court said the superior court must provide court reporters to indigent litigants. Now the trial courts are stuck between a rock and a hard place.

Supreme Court Rejects Notice Requirement of Pregnancy Crisis Law

After the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in a controversial abortion case, California will get a second opinion on whether pregnancy counseling centers must notify women about contraception, abortion, and pre-natal care.

In National Institute of Family and Life Advocates v. Becerra, the Supreme Court struck down a California law that required the centers post notices about those options. The justices said the law "drowns out" the centers' own messages, and remanded the case for further consideration.

Now the U.S. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, which had upheld the law, will have to figure out how free speech really is in pregnancy counseling.

When it comes to vehicle emissions, the state of California has long been a leader in setting the most stringent standards. But, with the recent change in the administration at the EPA, as well as the efforts of lobbyists maybe, those high California standards are facing a potential upheaval.

Rather than waiting to see what happens, California, 16 other states, and the District of Columbia, have joined together to seek appellate review of the EPA's final agency action in regard to changing the emissions standards for 2022-2025 model year vehicles.