STI OUTDOOR v. Superior Court

Good Law
109 Cal. Rptr. 2d 865·2001 Cal. App. LEXIS 615·2001 Daily Journal DAR 8109·91 Cal. App. 4th 334·2001 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 6657
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaAugust 2, 2001B148102, B148106California2,441 words

Opinion

Opinion

Hastings, J.

Real Party in Interest Eller Media Company (Eller) requested certain documents from the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (the MTA) pursuant to the California Public Records Act (Gov. Code, § 6250 et seq.). When the MTA refused to turn the documents over, Eller filed a petition for a writ of mandate in the Los Angeles County Superior Court (case No. BS065832). STI Outdoor LLC (STI) was given leave to intervene in the action as a real party in interest. At a hearing on December 29, 2000, the superior court granted the petition in part, ordering the MTA to produce some of the documents requested. STI then filed a petition for writ of mandate in this court, and was assigned case No. B148102. A companion petition was filed by the MTA in case No. B148106. We ordered that the two writ petitions be consolidated. We issued an order to show cause on May 3, 2001, ordering the respondent superior court to show cause why it should not enter a new and different judgment exempting from disclosure three documents. Eller filed a return to the petition on May 29, 2001, and STI and the MTA filed replies to the return. After considering all the pleadings and oral…

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.