California Appellate Tracker

Blue v. California Office of the Inspector General

May 29, 2018

The Legislature directed the Inspector General to investigate the treatment of prisoners at the High Desert prison, so the IG’s office should have won its Anti-SLAPP motion when it got sued for interrogating police officers, allegedly in violation of the Police Officers’ Bill of Rights Act.

The trial court erred in denying the defendant’s Anti-SLAPP motion to dismiss a suit charging that the Inspector General had interrogated prison guards in violation of their rights under the Police Officers’ Bill of Rights Act. The Legislature directed Inspector General to investigate the treatment of prisoners at the High Desert prison and report back to the Legislature on his findings. The gathering of information for the report was protected conduct as an official proceeding and as an exercise of free speech in connection with an issue of public interest. The plaintiffs failed to show a probability of success on their claims since the POBRA restrictions on interrogating police officers applied only to interrogations undertaken in connection with disciplinary proceedings against the police officers. The Inspector General’s interviews were not undertaken for that purpose.

California Court of Appeal, Third District (Hoch, J.); May 10, 2018; 2018 Cal. App. LEXIS 428

Subscribe to California Appellate Tracker

Thank you for your desire to subscribe to Severson & Werson’s Appellate Tracker Weblog. In order to subscribe, you must provide a valid name and e-mail address. This too will be retained on our server. When you push the “subscribe button”, we will send an electronic mail to the address that you provided asking you to confirm your subscription to our Weblog. By pushing the “subscribe button”, you represent and warrant that you are over the age of 18 years old, are the owner/authorized user of that e-mail address, and are entitled to receive e-mails at that address. Our weblog will retain your name and e-mail address on its server, or the server of its web host. However, we won’t share any of this information with anyone except the Firm’s employees and contractors, except under certain extraordinary circumstances described on our Privacy Policy and (About The Consumer Finance Blog/About the Appellate Tracker Weblog) Page. NOTICE AND AGREEMENT REGARDING E-MAILS AND CALLS/TEXT MESSAGES TO LAND-LINE AND WIRELESS TELEPHONES: By providing your contact information and confirming your subscription in response to the initial e-mail that we send you, you agree to receive e-mail messages from Severson & Werson from time-to-time and understand and agree that such messages are or may be sent by means of automated dialing technology. If you have your email forwarded to other electronic media, including text messages and cellular telephone by way of VoIP, internet, social media, or otherwise, you agree to receive my messages in that way. This may result in charges to you. Your agreement and consent also extend to any other agents, affiliates, or entities to whom our communications are forwarded. You agree that you will notify Severson & Werson in writing if you revoke this agreement and that your revocation will not be effective until you notify Severson & Werson in writing. You understand and agree that you will afford Severson & Werson a reasonable time to unsubscribe you from the website, that the ability to do so depends on Severson & Werson’s press of business and access to the weblog, and that you may still receive one or more emails or communications from weblog until we are able to unsubscribe you.

I Agree

Effective, Experienced, Exceptional.

California Appellate Tracker

Blue v. California Office of the Inspector General

Categories

San Francisco

Severson & Werson

Orange County

Severson & Werson