Calif. Court Reporters Ass'n Inc. v. Jud. Council of Calif.

Good Law
1997 Cal. App. LEXIS 995·59 Cal. App. 4th 959·69 Cal. Rptr. 2d 529·97 Daily Journal DAR 14643·97 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 9097
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaDecember 3, 1997A076631California1,654 words

Opinion

Opinion

Reardon, J.

After we ruled that appellant Judicial Council of California exceeded its powers in promulgating rules allowing electronic recording of superior court proceedings without legislative authorization, respondents California Court Reporters Association, Inc. (CCRA) and others sought entry of judgment in their favor. (See California Court Reporters Assn. v. Judicial Council of California (1995) 39 Cal.App.4th 15, 17-18, 34 [ 46 Cal.Rptr.2d 44 ] (CCRA I).) The Judicial Council and Alameda County officials—whose local rule enacted in reliance on the California Rules of Court was also invalidated—objected to the form of the proposed judgment and proposed their own. The trial court entered judgment unsatisfactory to the Judicial Council, Alameda County Auditor-Controller Patrick O’Connell and Alameda County Executive Officer Ron Overholt. On appeal, they contend that three paragraphs of the judgment should be vacated. Specifically, they contend that (1) the injunction imposed is in excess of the trial court’s jurisdiction because it purports to rule on unlitigated issues; (2) the injunction is vague and overbroad, and thus should be vacated; (3) the injunction improperly threatens…

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.