Tafoya

Tafoya v. Hastings College of Law

Good Law
191 Cal. App. 3d 437·1987 Cal. App. LEXIS 1616·236 Cal. Rptr. 395
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaApril 27, 1987A029155California4,444 words

Opinion

Opinion

Barry-Deal, J.

The issue before us is whether the faculty meetings of the Hastings College of the Law (Hastings) are subject to the Bagley-Keene Open Meeting Act (Bagley-Keene Act or Act) (Gov. Code, §§11120-11131). We hold that they are not.

Procedural History

In March 1984, Fernando Tafoya, Kevin McCarthy, and Jackson Chin, Hastings students when the action was commenced, filed a complaint for injunctive and declaratory relief against Hastings, members of the Hastings Board of Directors (Board), various Hastings deans, and certain Hastings faculty members (collectively referred to as Hastings). They allege that the faculty meets periodically in private, where it exercises certain authority delegated to it by the Board which, the students believe, “includes, but is not limited to, matters of educational policy, and the approval of expenditures from appropriations, gifts and endowments.” The faculty, they allege, was created by formal action of the Board, and the students believe that the faculty, through its private meetings, advises the Board on matters of educational policy and expenditures.

They further allege that, because the Board is a state body within the meaning of the…

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.