Kleitman v. Superior Court

In Kleitman v. Superior Court (1999) 74 Cal.App.4th 324, the defendant argued that the Ralph M. Brown Act (Brown Act; Gov. Code, 54950 et seq.) "sunshine laws" created an absolute privilege for agency discussions that occurred during a statutorily authorized "closed session." The appellate court began its analysis by reviewing the structure of the Brown Act, which enumerated two instances in which information from a closed session could be disclosed in the context of litigation. (74 Cal.App.4th at pp. 332-333.) The court held that, because the Legislature had specifically described the limited instances in which closed session discussions could be disclosed in litigation, the statute impliedly barred disclosure in any other circumstance. (Id. at pp. 334-336 & fn. 9.) Specifically, the Brown Act provides that: (1) minutes from a closed session are subject to in camera review by a trial court when it is alleged that a violation of the Brown Act has occurred during a closed session, and; (2) tape recordings of a closed session are subject to disclosure where "there exists a prior judgment that the legislative body held unlawful closed sessions, a court order to make tape recordings, and a factual showing that another violation has occurred ... ." (Kleitman, supra, 74 Cal.App.4th at p. 333.)