California Law Revision Commission

The meeting addressed several administrative matters, including the resignation of the Chair and the election of new officers, where Vice Chair Richard Simpson was elected Chair and Victor King was elected Vice Chair for two terms extending through October 11, 2026. The Commission approved the draft Minutes of the June 26, 2025 meeting. Discussions concerning the 2025 Legislative Program occurred without required decisions. For Study E-200 regarding the Recodification of Toxic Substance Statutes, the Commission provisionally approved several technical changes and inclusions for a future tentative recommendation. For Study I-100 on the Equal Rights Amendment, the Commission approved the staff draft final recommendation for submission to the legislature. Under Study B-750 concerning Antitrust Law, the Commission voted to move forward with recommendations on Single Firm Conduct separately, rejected Option One, and directed staff to revise Option Two, focusing on prohibiting unreasonable restraint of trade and monopolization. The Commission also directed revisions to the basic purpose statement to emphasize protecting free and fair competition and prohibiting anticompetitive business practices that impede worker freedom. Furthermore, the Commission directed staff to codify a nonexclusive list of elements of federal precedents that are not binding on California law.

The Commission met to review several administrative and study matters. Administrative topics included a budget update, office space review, website contract discussion, hiring status review, and consideration of new proposed topics for the Resolution of Authority, specifically regarding writ practice. The Commission also voted to delete the scheduled September 2026 meeting. Key study items involved reviewing the cumulative draft of recodified provisions for the Toxic Substances Statutes (Study E-200) and reviewing the Staff Draft Final Recommendation for Antitrust Law (Study B-750). The Commission requested clarification on language in proposed Section 16730 and approved the Staff Draft Final Recommendation for Study B-750, which outlines the purpose of the Cartwright Act in promoting free and fair competition.

The meeting commenced with establishing a quorum. Key administrative matters included a budget update noting the state's revenue struggles and the development of a new budget tracking template. The commission is actively seeking new office space through DGS facilities services and is in ongoing discussions regarding a website contract. Staff reported actively working with DGS to fill a vacant attorney position. The commission discussed and approved work priorities, including seeking introduction of the biennial resolution of authority to potentially add the education code to study topics. Specific active studies discussed included the antitrust study (anticipating final recommendations on single firm conduct and mergers), the equal rights amendment study (recommendation to move to inactive file after final recommendation approval), and the recodification of toxic substances statutes (anticipated to continue study throughout 2026). The study on removing terms dependent adult and dependent person from codes remains active, with work on emergency related reforms postponed due to staff demands in 2025. The commission considered reactivating the suspended study on civil discovery cases following the sunset of related legislation AB383. A new study was proposed by the California Association of School Board School Business Officials regarding numerous reporting requirements for local education agencies, receiving support from the California School Boards Association; the commission decided to pursue this by seeking authority to study the education code. Public comment was received in support of studying education code reporting requirements.

The Commission approved the draft Minutes of the September 18, 2025 meeting without change. Administrative matters included a report from the Executive Director on budget, office space, website contract, and a vacant attorney position. The Commission approved staff recommendations regarding priorities and proposed topics for the Resolution of Authority, including seeking legislative authority to study Education Code topics. The proposed 2026 meeting schedule was reviewed, with a directive to move the January 23 meeting to January 30. Revisions to the Commission Handbook and CLRC Style Guide and Procedures Manual were approved, including changes to definitions and recognition of service. Regarding Study E-200 (Recodification of Toxic Substances Statutes), the Commission approved revisions to three provisions and the addition of the inconsistent statutory citation of the Administrative Procedure Act as a possible future study topic. The Commission provisionally approved proposed revisions for inclusion in a tentative recommendation for this study. For Study B-750 (Antitrust Law), the staff draft tentative recommendation for Single Firm Conduct was approved for public comment, including specific edits to proposed Section 16731(f). Work on one option for Mergers and Acquisitions was directed to cease, and staff was directed to present revised options incorporating suggested amendments and further information on 'appreciable risk' and the Herfindahl-Hirschman Index (HHI). Study I-200 (Terminology Relating to Persons with Disabilities) received a status report with no decisions made.

The meeting commenced with the establishment of a quorum following procedural notes on attendance, including the replacement of a stepping down Senator. An extern from UC Law School was welcomed. The main discussion focused on adding a new study topic to the commission's resolution of authority: a study of writ practice. This suggestion originated from Justice Daniel Bramberg of the Sixth District Court of Appeal, citing that writ practice is poorly understood, inefficient, and unevenly applied across state courts. The discussion detailed the types of writs (mandamus, prohibition, certiorari) and the perceived issues, such as a lack of governing statutes and inconsistent application across court divisions, which leads to inefficiencies and frivolous filings. Commissioners strongly endorsed pursuing the study due to the potential for efficiency benefits within the court system, noting that statutory changes could lead to corresponding rule updates by the Judicial Council. The necessity of adding this topic to the resolution of authority for submission to the legislature was noted.