In County of Los Angeles Board of Supervisors v. Superior Court (ACLU), ordered published June 22, 2017, the Second District Court of Appeal, Division 3, addressed this case on remand from the California Supreme Court. The Supreme Court's opinion ruled that billing invoices from outside counsel to public entities in pending cases are exempt from the California Public Records Act, because every portion--including fee totals--communicate attorney-client information. But it left open the possibility that fee totals from long-concluded matters may not be exempt from the CPRA.
On remand, the appellate court interpreted the Supreme Court's decision as holding that the only portion of an invoice from a long-concluded proceeding that may be subject to the CPRA is the fee total. Whether the fee total communicates attorney-client information is a factual inquiry for the trial court. The appellate court also rejected the document-seeker's argument that the trial court should examine the redactions of attorney-client information in camera to determine whether too much was cut out. Absent party permission, courts cannot examine in camera information claimed to be protected by attorney-client information to determine if the privilege applies.
Comments