|
JUDICIAL AUTHORITY
With very limited exceptions, unpublished decisions are not citable. The same is true of decisions that were published but in which rehearing was granted, or which the California Supreme Court accepted for review, or have been depublished or withdrawn. At that point, the decision has the same effect as one that was never published in the first place, and nothing that happens to it later will change that. Now, what about the authority of published decisions?
The California Constitution gives Superior Courts appellate jurisdiction over Municipal Court matters. Since court unification, the Rules of Court have given them appellate jurisdiction over Limited Civil Matters. You might hear it called the Appellate Department, but the proper name of the Superior Court's appellate body is the Appellate Division. Its decisions are not binding on anybody other than the parties in the case before it, not even on the Appellate Division itself. But its published opinions are sometimes regarded as persuasive and have even been cited by the California Supreme Court.
Published decisions of the Court of Appeal do not bind the Court of Appeal. But according to Auto Equity Sales (57 Cal.2d 450), they bind all the trial courts in the state, regardless of district. This means that when Court of Appeal decisions disagree, a trial court must choose the view it prefers. As the Court of Appeal pointed out in the 1987 case of McCallum v McCallum (190 Cal.App.3d 308), though, a trial court is most likely to choose the opinion of the Court of Appeal in its own district. Because that's where the appeal from its decision will go. You see, in theory there's no difference between theory and practice, but in practice there is.
The only way to resolve the problem of conflicting authority is for the California Supreme Court to decide the issue, since, of course, its decision is binding on everyone.
California Court of Appeal and California Supreme Court decisions bind lower federal trial and appellate courts on matters of California law. On the other hand, in1933 the California Supreme Court pointed out in Bank of Italy v Bentley (217 Cal. 644) that except for the United States Supreme Court, federal decisions do not bind California courts at all. That's true even when they interpret federal law. In theory.
|
|
|