My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
CORRESPONDENCE_2001-2002
EnvironmentalHealth
>
EHD Program Facility Records by Street Name
>
S
>
SANTA FE
>
23023
>
4400 - Solid Waste Program
>
PR0504907
>
CORRESPONDENCE_2001-2002
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
4/3/2023 2:42:48 PM
Creation date
8/24/2022 11:19:50 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
EHD - Public
ProgramCode
4400 - Solid Waste Program
File Section
CORRESPONDENCE
FileName_PostFix
2001-2002
RECORD_ID
PR0504907
PE
4430
FACILITY_ID
FA0006398
FACILITY_NAME
SNYDERS SANITARY
STREET_NUMBER
23023
Direction
S
STREET_NAME
SANTA FE
STREET_TYPE
RD
City
ESCALON
Zip
95320
CURRENT_STATUS
01
SITE_LOCATION
23023 S SANTA FE RD
P_LOCATION
99
P_DISTRICT
005
QC Status
Approved
Scanner
SJGOV\cfield
Tags
EHD - Public
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
267
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
THE KIRK LAW FIRM <br /> San Joaquin County Environmental Health Division <br /> Attention: Tami <br /> December 13, 2001 <br /> Page 3 <br /> not otherwise exempt from disclosure before litigation commences, the fact that <br /> litigation does commence would not change the public nature of the record so as to <br /> exempt it from disclosure. Specifically, the subdivision would not exempt from <br /> disclosure such records of an agency that antedate the filing of a claim under the <br /> Tort Claims Act. <br /> ...As we now see, the chronological boundary to establish when the exemption of <br /> the subdivision applies, is the filing of the complaint or other initiating document, <br /> for the action; thereafter subdivision (b) would exempt from disclosure all <br /> documents generated in connection with the litigation. However, disclosure <br /> would be required of documents that pre-date the filing of the initiating <br /> document, unless their disclosure is protected by some other provision of law." <br /> [Emphasis Supplied] 71 Ops. Cal. Atty. Gen. 235. <br /> Under the litigation exemption, SJEHD may withhold records that were <br /> "specifically prepared for use in the litigation" after Delta Funding filed the claim. However, <br /> SJEHD must produce (1) all documents that were created in the ordinary course of business and <br /> (2) documents that predate the filing of the claim unless protected by another privilege such as <br /> attorney-client privilege or attorney work product privilege. The majority of SJEHD's file was <br /> prepared in the ordinary course of business, before Delta Funding's claim was filed, and must be <br /> produced. <br /> I hope we can resolve this matter without court intervention. If a court compels <br /> disclosure of these documents, SJEHD must pay the attorneys fees and court costs incurred by <br /> Delta Funding. Cal. Gov. Code Section 6259(d); Fontana Police Dept v. Villegas-Banuelos <br /> (1999) 74 CA4th 1249;Motorola v. Dept. of General Services (1997) 55 CA4th 1340. <br /> Please explain, in writing, why SJEHD believes the litigation exemption applies to <br /> their entire file. Cal. Gov. Code Section 6253(c). <br /> Very ruly yours, <br /> ennis J. Priolo <br /> for THE KIRK LAW FIRM <br /> DJP/bac <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.