The Supreme Court has announced a four-case February calendar. The arguments will be live streamed, as all arguments have been since May 2016.

The court continues on a pace for a low output of opinions. At this rate, there will be only 47 or 48 opinions this term, slightly fewer than last term’s historically low output. (Related: “What’s ailing the California Supreme Court? Its productivity has plummeted”.)

On Tuesday, February 7, in San Francisco, the court will hear the following cases (with the issue presented as summarized by court staff or limited by the court itself):

Tansavatdi v. City of Rancho Palos Verdes: A week after granting review in April 2021, the court limited the issue to: “Can a public entity be held liable under Government Code section 830.8 for failure to warn of an allegedly dangerous design of public property that is subject to Government Code section 830.6 design immunity?” The case is also the answer to this trivia question: What is the first review-granted Court of Appeal opinion that, under a 2021 rule revision, can be cited for the “purpose of establishing the existence of a conflict in authority that would in turn allow trial courts to exercise discretion under Auto Equity Sales, Inc. v. Superior Court (1962) 57 Cal.2d 450, 456, to choose between sides of any such conflict”? (See here and here.)

Davis v. Fresno Unified School District: When the court granted review in March 2021, it limited the issue to:  “Is a lease-leaseback arrangement in which construction is financed through bond proceeds rather than by or through the builder a ‘contract’ within the meaning of Government Code section 53511?” The question is relevant to whether the plaintiff in the case can prosecute a taxpayer’s action seeking disgorgement.

In re F.M.: Did the Court of Appeal err in ruling that the trial court adequately exercised its discretion to determine whether the juvenile’s offenses were felonies or misdemeanors as required by Welfare and Institutions Code section 702 and In re Manzy W. (1997) 14 Cal.4th 1199? In October 2021, the court granted the petition for review that was filed 10 days late.

People v. Wilson: This is an automatic direct appeal from a December 2010 judgment of death. The court’s website does not list issues for death penalty appeals. Counsel was appointed in June 2011. Initial briefing was completed in October 2015.