[sudo-law] Fwd: Legal case could kill key part of San Francisco sunshine law

[eddan.com]

sent from eddan.com

Begin forwarded message:

> From: Richard Knee <rak0408 at EARTHLINK.NET>
> Date: March 10, 2014 at 4:49:23 PM PDT
> To: FOI-L at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU
> Subject: Legal case could kill key part of San Francisco sunshine law
> Reply-To: Richard Knee <rak0408 at EARTHLINK.NET>
> 
> By Tim Redmond
> 
> There’s a legal case making its way through the court system that could invalidate a critical part of the city’s landmark Sunshine Ordinance.
> 
> The case, St. Croix v Superior Court, stems from a lawsuit sunshine activist Allen Grossman filed seeking copies of the communications the Ethics Commission had with the City Attorney’s Office over proposed changes to how the commission handles sunshine complaints.
> 
> At issue is one of the trickier points of law: Does the long-sacred right of attorney-client privilege always trump the ability of the voters in a city to mandate the release of documents?
> 
> [. . .]
> 
> http://48hillsonline.org/2014/03/10/legal-case-could-invalidate-part-of-sfs-landmark-sunshine-ordinance/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.sudoroom.org/pipermail/law/attachments/20140310/8e69c13a/attachment.html>