Judicial Discipline Records Face First-Ever Audit After Deal Ends Dustup
State lawmakers in 2016 ordered the first audit of the commission in its 56-year history.
September 19, 2018 at 06:28 PM
4 minute read
The Commission on Judicial Performance and the state auditor formally ended their litigation over confidential disciplinary files Tuesday, when an appellate court approved a request to give the auditor access to the records.
The First District Court of Appeal reversed a December 2017 order by San Francisco Superior Court Judge Suzanne Bolanos that blocked the auditor, Elaine Howle, from starting a legislatively mandated review of the commission's disciplinary practices. The appellate court's order was issued one day after Gov. Jerry Brown signed legislation clarifying that Howle's office cannot make public any records it obtains during the audit.
“The Superior Court decision might … have encouraged other state and local agencies to evade or resist audits of their activities,” Howle's attorney, Myron Moskovitz, said in an email. “So the state auditor is … happy that this problem has been eliminated.”
Kerr & Wagstaffe partner Michael von Loewenfeldt, who represented the commission, did not immediately return a message seeking comment.
A six-page settlement agreement released Wednesday said the two parties will issue a joint statement within seven days of the court order announcing that the lawsuit was settled “in the best interests of the public.”
Read the settlement agreement between the CJP and the state auditor:
“However neither party shall claim that they 'prevailed' on the appeal or that the reversal was anything other than a stipulated result reached after settlement discussions,” the agreement said.
The two agencies had signaled an end to the two-year-old dispute in August when the related legislation was introduced and the commission proposed amending its operating rules to allow the auditor to review confidential records. Commission leaders had argued that without the rule change they were barred by law from sharing documents with Howle.
State lawmakers in 2016 ordered the first audit of the commission in its 56-year history after complaints from judges and litigants about the judicial disciplinary process and its secrecy.
The commission, citing confidentiality laws, sued the auditor in October 2016 to block her access to discipline documents. Howle said she and her staff would abide by those laws. More than a year later, Bolanos sided with the commission, finding that the agency had a “constitutional right to control the confidentiality of its documents.”
The auditor appealed the ruling this year. During budget hearings, legislators, trying to pressure the commission to allow the audit, stripped $500,000 from the agency's 2018-19 budget—an amount equal to the estimated cost of the audit. In June, lawmakers restored the money and one month later the commission proposed the confidentiality rule change.
Moskovitz said the audit should begin in a few days. Both sides will bear their own legal fees and litigation costs, according to the settlement agreement.
Read more:
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllSanta Clara County Superior Court Authorizes Electronic Recording of Proceedings
4 minute readRegulatory Upheaval Is Coming. How Businesses Prepare and Respond Will Separate Winners and Losers
California-Based Portal Crypto Exchange Faces Delaware Investor Class Action
3 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Trying a Case for Abu Ghraib Detainees Two Decades After Abuse
- 2The Distribution of Dangerous Products Via Online Marketplaces
- 3The Products Liability Case Against Tianeptine: The Deadly ‘Dietary Supplement’ Found at Your Local Store
- 4The Evolving Landscape of Joint and Several Liability in Pa.: A Post-'Spencer' Analysis
- 5A Deep Dive Into the Product-Line Exception in Pennsylvania
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250