Vol. 20 No. 3- Smith V. City Of Hemet, Et Al.
SMITH V. CITY OF HEMET, ET AL. January 21, 2005 On August 16, 1999, Hemet police officers responded to the home of Thomas Smith because Cynthia Smith had called 911 to report that her husband was hitting her and had grabbed her breast very hard. While Cynthia Smith was on the telephone with the 911 […]
Vol. 20 No. 15- POBR and the one-year statute of Limitations
POBR AND THE ONE-YEAR STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS September 1, 2005 The California Court of Appeal, Fourth Appellate District, ruled on August 29, 2005, in the case ofCastagna v. City of Seal Beach et al., that the Seal Beach Police Department did not violate any provisions of the Peace Officers Procedural Bill of Rights Act (POBR) […]
Vol. 20 No. 16- If a Peace Officer Chooses to Lie; Be Prepared to Say “Goodbye”
IF A PEACE OFFICER CHOOSES TO LIE; BE PREPARED TO SAY “GOODBYE.” September 19, 2005 On September 12, 2005, the California Court of Appeal published the case of Kolender v. San Diego County Civil Service Commission ( Berry ), where it ruled that it is justifiable to terminate the employment of a peace officer for […]
Vol. 20 No. 17- New Pursuit Legislation: A Successful Cooperative Effort
NEW PURSUIT LEGISLATION: A SUCCESSFUL COOPERATIVE EFFORT October 14, 2005 On October 6, 2005, Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger signed into legislation Senate Bill 719 which directly impacts upon law enforcement’s authority to pursue fleeing suspects. Senate Bill 719 was sponsored by Senator Gloria Romero and was drafted with the cooperation of diverse law enforcement stake holders. […]
Vol. 21 No. 5- Kern County Vs. Sparks: Sometimes The Good Guy Wins
KERN COUNTY vs. SPARKS: “Sometimes the Good Guy Wins” March 15, 2006 As many of you already know, retired Kern County Sheriff Carl Sparks was sued by the Kern County Board of Supervisors and accused of filing false claims to justify authorizing premium pay for seven commanders covering a fourteen year period of time. The […]
Vol. 21 No. 3- Cost Recovery Of Expenses Responding To Dui Incidents
Cost Recovery of Expenses Responding to DUI Incidents February 14, 2006 On January 4, 2006, the California Court of Appeal clarified what expenses can be recovered as a result of emergency responses to incidents caused by individuals operating motor vehicles while under the influence of an intoxicant. In the case of California Highway Patrol v. […]
Vol. 21 No. 4- Pers Retired Annuitants: Interim Positions V. Extra Help
PERS RETIRED ANNUITANTS: Interim Positions v. Extra Help February 14, 2006 Questions have arisen regarding the manner and duration in which retired annuitants from the Public Employee Retirement System (PERS) can work for PERS agencies after retirements. It is important to note that the PERS system does not permit an individual who has retired to […]
Vol. 21 No. 2- Impounding Vehicles Revisited
Impounding Vehicles Revisited January 17, 2006 The Ninth Circuit U. S. Court of Appeals recently ruled, in the case of Miranda v. City of Cornelius, 429 F.3d 858, that impounding vehicles, when the only charge is driving without a license, was unconstitutional if there is no justification under the “community caretaker” doctrine (see Jones & Mayer Client Alert […]
Vol. 21 No. 1- IMPOUNDING A VEHICLE MAY BE UNCONSTITUTIONAL
Impounding a Vehicle may be Unconstitutional January 4, 2006 Plaintiffs sued the City and a towing company for an unreasonable seizure under the Fourth Amendment. The United States District Court for the District of Oregon, in the case of Miranda v. City of Cornelius; Acme Towing, Inc., granted summary judgment in favor of the defendants […]
CSSA Magazine Article- FLSA – Who is Exempt?
“FLSA – WHO IS EXEMPT?” January, 2006 By: Martin J. Mayer JONES & MAYER Not too long ago, the Federal Department of Labor modified Part 541 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) regarding exemptions from the minimum wage and overtime provisions of the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA). Questions have arisen, as a result […]