Orange County Employees Ass'n v. Superior Court

Good Law

120 Cal. App. 4th 287·15 Cal. Rptr. 3d 201·2004 Cal. App. LEXIS 1036·2004 Daily Journal DAR 8008·2004 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 5898

Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJune 30, 2004G032619California4,599 words

Opinion

Sills, J.

The Orange County Employees Association (OCEA) represents over 1,300 employees of the Orange County Superior Court (the Court). By this petition for writ of mandate, filed directly in this court, the OCEA seeks to compel the Court and the County of Orange (the County) to disclose records relating to reimbursement of travel expenses for judges and management employees of the Court pursuant to the California Public Records Act (Gov. Code, § 6250 et seq.) (CPRA) and rule 6.702 of the California Rules of Court. The Court moved to dismiss the petition and for an award of sanctions, claiming the petition was frivolous.

We find the CPRA does not apply to the requested disclosure. Furthermore, the Legislature has expressed its intent that a petition for relief from an alleged violation of rule 6.702 should be heard first in the superior court. (§ 71675.) Therefore, we dismiss the petition, but we deny the request for sanctions.

FACTS

In 2001, OCEA negotiated memoranda of understanding (MOU’s) regarding wages, hours and working conditions on behalf of three bargaining units of its members. The MOU’s provide for a 4 percent general salary increase effective June 27, 2003,…

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.