County of Riverside v. Superior Court

Good Law
103 Cal. Rptr. 2d 62·86 Cal. App. 4th 211
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMarch 14, 2001E026321California3,585 words

Opinion

Opinion

Michael Stone Lawyers, Michael P. Stone, Pasadena, and Muna Busailah, for Real Party in Interest.

WARD, Acting P.J.

In this original proceeding the petitioner, County of Riverside ("County"), asks this court to vacate an order of the trial court by which it required the County to disclose to real party in interest, Xavier Martin Madrigal (Madrigal), certain items in his personnel file. We conclude that the trial court was correct and accordingly deny the petition. [1]

The underlying lawsuit is an action for damages brought by real party in interest Madrigal. Madrigal was employed by the City of Perris as a police officer with permanent status when that municipality decided to contract with the County for the provision of law enforcement services, thus dissolving the police department. The County "absorbed" the Perris officers, who became deputy sheriffs. However, these deputies, of whom Madrigal was one, were apparently considered to be "on probation" and the County conducted the same background checks on the "new" deputies as it would with any applicant for employment.

Madrigal was discharged, apparently in response to information collected by the County in the course of…

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.