The Supreme Court’s actions of note at its conference yesterday included:

  • In California Medical Association v. Aetna Health of California, Inc., the court agreed to review the Second District, Division Eight, Court of Appeal published opinion holding a physician association had no standing to challenge a health insurer’s policy restricting or eliminating patient referrals by in-network physicians to out-of-network physicians.  The appellate court found the action — under the Unfair Competition Law — could not proceed because the association had not itself suffered injury from the policy.
  • Justice Leondra Kruger recorded a dissenting vote from the court’s denial of review in Ruegg & Ellsworth v. City of Berkeley, where a 67-page published opinion by the First District, Division Two, held Berkeley improperly denied an application that had been made under a statute providing a “streamlined, ministerial approval process” for certain affordable housing projects.  Part of the dispute arose because the project at issue is to be built on a site designated by the City as an historic landmark — an ancient area Berkeley said is highly significant to native descendants as a sacred burial ground.  (See Bob Egleko’s report in the San Francisco Chronicle.)
  • The court denied review in People v. McCarter over the dissenting recorded vote of Justice Joshua Groban.  In a divided unpublished opinion, the Third District mostly affirmed a long prison sentence for rape, attempted rape, and assault with a deadly weapon.  Because the appellate court addressed several different issues, it’s unclear which one or ones attracted Justice Groban’s attention.  (See here.)  However, the dissent focused only on the majority’s conclusion that the superior court shouldn’t be given the chance to exercise its discretion under post-judgment legislation — Senate Bill 1393 — to strike sentence enhancements for previous serious felony convictions.
  • Justice Groban also dissented from the denial of review in People v. Thomas, where the Third District, in a partially published opinion, affirmed the defendant’s conviction for the second degree murder of her 22-month-old son.  The published portion of the opinion found no error in admitting evidence from defendant’s boyfriend — and co-defendant — showing she had a propensity to commit child abuse.
  • The court denied review of a published opinion that expressly disagreed with another Court of Appeal decision.  In Oakland Police Officers’ Association v. City of Oakland, the First District, Division One, blocked disclosure to officers, who were being investigated for misconduct, of certain materials the officers sought under the Public Safety Officers Procedural Bill of Rights Act.  The appellate court found unconvincing the Fourth District, Division Three, opinion in Santa Ana Police Officers Assn. v. City of Santa Ana (2017) 13 Cal.App.5th 317.  No petition for review was filed in the Santa Ana case, but there was a depublication request, which the Supreme Court denied.
  • There were 14 criminal case grant-and-holds:  three more holding for People v. Lewis, which was decided on Monday; two more holding for Lewis and People v. Strong (see here); three more holding for Lewis and People v. Lopez (see here) (that’s a total of 322 Lewis grant-and holds); one more holding for Strong; two more holding for Lopez; one more holding for People v. Raybon (see here), which was argued in May; one more holding for People v. Delgadillo (see here); and one more holding for People v. Hernandez (see here).