27 September 2011

Family Court Sacramento - State Law Now Protects Court Employee Whistleblowers

New Law Designates Court Rule Violations as Improper Governmental Activity, Protects Court Employees From Retaliation  

Hon. Robert C. Hight – Hon. Bunmi O. Awoniyi – Hon. Steven M. Gevercer – Hon. Tami R. Bogert – Hon. James M. Mize – Vance Raye - CJP Victoria B. Henley – Hon. Thadd A. Blizzard -Whistleblower Protection Act California, State Auditors, Superior Court, Sacramento, Family Court -Divorce – attorney divorce – attorneys divorce – divorce attorney – divorce lawyer – divorce lawyers – lawyer divorce – lawyers for divorce – lawyer for divorce – domestic violence -
California State Auditor 
Whistleblower Hotline
Governor Jerry Brown yesterday signed into law Assembly Bill 1102. The bill updated and revised a number of Government Code statutes designating the functions and powers of the California State Auditor. In addition, a violation of a California Rule of Court by a state or court employee is now classified as an improper governmental activity equal to corruption, malfeasance, bribery, theft of government property, fraud, coercion, willful omission to perform duty, and similar types of misconduct.

The Supreme Court, Courts of Appeal, superior courts and Administrative Office of the Courts are now included in the California Whistleblower Protection Act "state agency" definition. Among other ramifications, the revised definition ensures that the protections of the Act extend to court employees. Under the Act, state employees who make complaints about improper governmental activities are protected from retaliation. Retaliation includes intimidation, the denial of appointment or promotion, a threat of adverse action, a poor performance evaluation, involuntary transfer, or any form of disciplinary action.

Court employees can report improper governmental activities to the State Auditor using the Whistleblower Hotline, by mail, or using an electronic form at the State Auditor website. Under a variety of state statutes, rules, and regulations, state employees who fail to report misconduct may themselves be guilty of misconduct and subject to discipline, job termination, or criminal prosecution. Employee conduct standards include Article 20 of the California Constitution, California Rules of Court rules 10.16, 10.17, and 10.670 and the Court Employee Code of Ethics

Court employees may be subject to criminal prosecution under several statutes, including Penal Code sections 470(c) and 470(d), which prohibit altering, corrupting, or falsifying documents. Failing to report a co-worker engaged in criminal conduct may expose a court employee to the same criminal prosecution as an accessory, for aiding and abetting, conspiracy, or under the natural and probable consequences doctrine.   
For the complete California Whistleblower Protection Act, click here. 

Judge Robert Hight – Judge Bunmi Awoniyi – Judge Steven Gevercer – Judge Tami Bogert – Judge James Mize – Vance Raye - Victoria Henley CJP - Judge Thadd Blizzard -Chris Volkers Court Executive Officer - California State Auditor - Judge Steve White - Sacramento County Superior Court Audit - Presiding Judge Sacramento County Superior Court - Hon. Laurie Earls - Edward Pollard Interim Court Executive Officer – Sacramento Family Court – Sacramento County Superior Court - Whistleblower Protection Act California, State Auditors, Superior Court, Sacramento, Family Court