Laws

Laws v. County of San Diego

Caution
1990 Cal. App. LEXIS 306·219 Cal. App. 3d 189·267 Cal. Rptr. 921
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMarch 28, 1990D009800California4,972 words

Opinion

Opinion

Huffman, J.

Bolitha James Laws III and four other employees of the San Diego County Sheriff’s Department appeal the trial court’s denial of their petition for writ of mandate and its unfavorable ruling on their request for declaratory relief that the County of San Diego (the County) has a duty to provide them independent counsel on the Cumis model established in insurance litigation. Laws and his fellow petitioners (Laws), as well as their employer the County, were sued by various civil plaintiffs for both compensatory and punitive damages on theories of police misconduct. Laws contends a conflict of interest exists between the County and himself, based on their codefendant status, such that common representation by the office of county counsel is violative of ethical rules governing the conduct of attorneys and is in contravention of the principles announced by this court in Cumis. In addition he contends the trial court erred in refusing his request for a statement of decision under Code of Civil Procedure section 632.

We have examined Laws’s claims in light of the extensive statutory scheme governing the indemnification and defense of public employees (Gov. Code, §§ 825 et seq.,…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.