EdLawConnect Blog

The California Public Records Act (CPRA) provides for the disclosure of public records kept by the state, local agencies, school districts and community college districts, and county offices of education. On April 19, 2013, the Commission on State Mandates (Commission) adopted a statement of decision and parameters and guidelines regarding state-mandated reimbursement for certain costs local ...

On February 21, 2013, Senate President pro Tem Darrell Steinberg and Assembly Member Cristina Garcia introduced Senate Bill (“SB”) 520 to promote an online student access platform for students of California’s Community Colleges, the California State University, and the University of California. Proponents of the bill state SB 520 would provide for increased availability of online ...

A plaintiff claiming permanent disability stemming from on-the-job injuries suffered a significant blow to his case as a result of deleting his Facebook account. A New Jersey federal district court ruled the plaintiff’s actions merited an “adverse inference” jury instruction, meaning the jury that will eventually hear the plaintiff’s lawsuit will be notified that the plaintiff intentionally destroyed evidence he believed would harm his case. (Gatto v. United Air Lines, Inc. (D.N.J. 2013) 2013 WL 1285285.)

In 2010 Congress enacted the Federal “Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act” (“Act”) setting the stage for sweeping reform of the U.S. health care system. The most controversial provision in the Act is the “Individual Mandate” which requires every American to have a minimum level of health insurance by 2014 or face certain financial penalties. Congress used the Commerce Clause found ...

When educational institutions first embraced technology, a boilerplate Acceptable Use Policy (“AUP”) was generally sufficient to address many concerns about inappropriate behaviors, user expectations, system ownership, and electronic communications. In order to secure funding and grants, most institutions timely implemented an AUP and moved onto other more pressing issues. As technology ...

California community colleges are required to admit any California resident with a high school diploma.  But what if an applicant has been expelled or faces expulsion proceedings from another district for violent acts? Could such an applicant simply re-enroll in a neighboring district?  A new law, effective January 1, 2013, allows a district to deny admission, after holding a hearing to determine whether the ...

Legal challenges of affirmative action, and of affirmative action bans, in public higher education continue to occupy the courts.  In 2012, the federal courts gave conflicting rulings on the constitutionality of affirmative action bans enacted by California and Michigan, and the Supreme Court has been asked to give the final say.

Proposition 209, approved by California voters November 1996, added Article ...

Under Public Contract Code sections 20111 and 20651, school and community college districts must competitively bid and award a contract involving the expenditure of more than $50,000, adjusted for inflation, to the lowest responsible bidder. The threshold for the bidding requirement is increased annually to reflect the change in the Implicit Price Deflator for State and Local Government Purchases of Goods and Services for the United States, as published by the United States Department of Commerce for the 12-month period ending in the prior fiscal year. The adjustment is not the same as the revenue limit cost-of-living adjustment.

Where is the boundary between the free speech rights of public employees who express controversial or offensive ideas or opinions, and the authority of public employers to limit employee speech that is claimed to be inconsistent with policies prohibiting harassment or other discrimination on the basis of race, sexual orientation or other protected characteristics? This question can be particularly ...

On August 31, 2012, AALRR attorneys Irma Rodriguez Moisa and Sharon J. Ormond obtained a unanimous jury defense verdict in favor of The Regents of the University of California after a 14-day jury trial.  The Plaintiff, James Friedman, was laid off from his position at the University of California at Los Angeles in April 2010 after a reorganization of his unit resulted in his position being eliminated.  He filed suit in September 2010 against the Regents, alleging: age and religious creed discrimination in violation of the Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA); retaliation for protesting or opposing of age and gender discrimination in his department in violation of the FEHA; failure to take steps to prevent retaliation from occurring in violation of the FEHA; whistleblower retaliation under California Labor Code section 1102.5 for reporting alleged copyright violations; and wrongful termination in violation of public policy.  He further sued two management employees of the University, alleging defamation and intentional infliction of emotional distress.  (James Friedman v. The Regents of the University of California, et al., Los Angeles Superior Court, Case No. BC445059.)