38 Cal. App. 4th 737 - Michael v. Gates’s Empirical Analysis
1995
Citation profile
4 federal appellate · 12 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 16 later decisions — most recently July 2017
4 federal appellate · 12 state decisions
Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.
Relationships
Relies on 11 Cal. 3d 531 - Pitchess v. Superior Court · 7 Cal. 4th 1 - Hill v. National Collegiate Athletic Assn. · 56 Cal. 2d 355 - Greyhound Corp. v. Superior Court · 49 Cal. 3d 74 - City of Santa Cruz v. Municipal Court · 15 Cal. App. 4th 1611 - Shields v. Singleton
Most-quoted passages
The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 16 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(a) In any case in which discovery or disclosure is sought of peace officer personnel records ..., the party seeking the disclosure shall file a written motion with the appropriate court or administrative body.... (b) The motion shall include ... [affidavits showing good cause for the discovery or disclosure sought, setting forth the materiality thereof to the subject matter involved in the pending litigation ....”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Gonzalez v. Spencer“An agency which reviews its own records with its attorney has not engaged in discovery. ... [R]ather than forbidding a governmental agency which has custody and control of peace officer personnel records from reviewing those records with its attorney, the [statutory] scheme contemplates, even demands, that a governmental agency and its lawyer will review those records, without noticed motion or court order.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Gonzalez v. Spencer“[W]e hold that where, as here, a governmental agency and its attorney conduct a contained and limited review of peace officer personnel files within the custody and control of the agency, for some relevant purpose, there is no disclosure under the statutes.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Gonzalez v. Spencer
How this case has been treated — in progress
Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.