Tomorrow morning, the Supreme Court will file its opinions in Sheppard, Mullin, Richter & Hampton, LLP v. J-M Manufacturing Co., Inc. and the consolidated cases of In re C.B. and In re C.H. (Briefs here; oral argument videos here and here.) The opinions — on the last regular filing day within the 90-day period for these cases — are the last for matters heard on the June calendar.
Sheppard, Mullin involves these questions: (1) May a court rely on non-legislative expressions of public policy to overturn an arbitration award on illegality grounds? (2) Can a sophisticated consumer of legal services, represented by counsel, give its informed consent to an advance waiver of conflicts of interest? (3) Does a conflict of interest that undisputedly caused no damage to the client and did not affect the value or quality of an attorney’s work automatically (i) require the attorney to disgorge all previously paid fees, and (ii) preclude the attorney from recovering the reasonable value of the unpaid work? Fourth District, Division One, Court of Appeal Justice Gilbert Nares is the pro tem.
In re C.B. and In re C.H. raise the common issue whether the trial court erred by refusing to order the expungement of a juvenile’s DNA record after his qualifying felony conviction was reduced to a misdemeanor under Proposition 47 (Pen. Code § 1170.18)? The C.H. case has this additional issue — Does the retention of juvenile’s DNA sample violate equal protection because a person who committed the same offense after Proposition 47 was enacted would be under no obligation to provide a DNA sample? Third District Justice William Murray, Jr., is the pro tem.
The opinions can be viewed tomorrow starting at 10:00 a.m.