State depublication rule draws criticism from judges, lawyers

That's the title of today's cover story in the DJ about how "A majority of judges and attorneys who responded to a request for public comment favor abolishing the state's 110-year-old practice of stripping precedential authority from appeals court opinions." As you know by now, the Supreme Court is poised to change the rule "that requires appellate decisions to be decertified from publication in official reports once the high court agrees to grant review. The practice of automatic depublication dates back to a 1905 appellate court opinion and was formally codified in 1964 in the California Rules of Court. Noel v. Smith, 2 Cal.App. 158." "The high court set a deadline to implement changes on January 1 but pushed back its deadline to July 1 after receiving 48 pages of responses from 37 individuals and groups." The article lists Justice Joseph Grodin (ret.) as supporting the change, and Solicitor General Edward DuMont as having "no preference." The APJ's of five of the six appellate districts supported the change (i.e., asking for opinions to remain published while review is pending), the one exception being the 2d's Roger Boren, who did not submit a comment.