This is the property of the Daily Journal Corporation and fully protected by copyright. It is made available only to Daily Journal subscribers for personal or collaborative purposes and may not be distributed, reproduced, modified, stored or transferred without written permission. Please click "Reprint" to order presentation-ready copies to distribute to clients or use in commercial marketing materials or for permission to post on a website. and copyright (showing year of publication) at the bottom.

participatory / Alternative Dispute Resolution

Jun. 7, 2019

Brady v Pitchess

Several state law enforcement agencies would like to inform prosecutors if officers have misconduct on their records, so prosecutors can seek and give to defendants any potential exculpatory evidence, as required by SCOTUS' 'Brady v. Maryland.' But does that violate California's 'Pitchess' laws, saying personnel files can only be opened in response to court orders?

Attorneys who brought and who argued the case before the state high court Wednesday - Geoffrey Sheldon (Liebert Cassidy Whitmore), Judy Posner (Benedon & Serlin) and Elizabeth Gibbons (The Gibbons Firm) - offer competing views.


Submit your own column for publication to Diana Bosetti

Related Tests for Alternative dispute resolution

self-study/Alternative Dispute Resolution

Term sheets and mediator proposals: not always enforceable, but valuable

By Mark Loeterman, Suzanne H. Segal

self-study/Alternative Dispute Resolution

So you think you have a binding arbitration agreement?

By David I. Brown

self-study/Alternative Dispute Resolution

ADR and this years’ most impactful decisions

By Paul Dubow

self-study/Alternative Dispute Resolution

Recent SCOTUS opinions on arbitration statutes

By Patrick Burns, Gary A. Watt

self-study/Alternative Dispute Resolution

The most important question

By Fred Bennett