California, Louisiana Supreme Courts Reject Traffic Cameras Rescues
The highest courts in California and Louisiana yesterday denied the requests of municipal officials desperate to save their photo enforcement programs. In New Orleans, the red light camera and speed camera program must shut down after the Louisiana Supreme Court unanimously rejected the city’s request to overturn the decision of Orleans Parish Civil District Court Judge Paulette R. Irons who found earlier this month that the program violated the city’s own charter.
“We are obviously disappointed in supreme court’s decision because these cameras have proven to be an important deterrent to unlawful traffic practices,” a city statement explained.
As a matter of law, the high court found no reason to overturn the Irons decision, just as the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals had done less than two weeks ago. As victorious Attorney Edward R. Washington III considers launching a class action suit to force refunds, the city is digging in its heels, refusing to pay back citations paid under the illegal program.
“It is our position that camera violations issued through yesterday will still be valid,” the city insisted. “You must continue to pay all tickets issued until this point.”
The California Supreme Court likewise rejected a request by the cities of Santa Ana and West Hollywood to depublish an appellate decision that found cities had to provide warning notices for thirty days at each and every red light camera intersection before issuing actual tickets ( view ruling). Almost no cities do so, raising the possibility of a class action challenge to refund tickets illegally issued.
The high court rejected municipal arguments and declared the case closed, leaving it to stand with precedential value in Orange County and persuasive value throughout the state. The decision comes as justices prepare to rule on a larger case that turns on the question of whether contracts for red light camera services paid on a per-ticket basis are inherently void. That case had been pending the resolution of a case, County of Santa Clara v. Atlantic Richfield, which the court decided in July.
[Courtesy: Thenewspaper.com]
More by The Newspaper
Latest Car Reviews
Read moreLatest Product Reviews
Read moreRecent Comments
- Wolfwagen I have worked as a manager in both union and non-union locations. The best union employees were the ones who were indifferent to the union or told them to get bent. The worst ones were the ones who would run to the union for every little thing, even when it was their own actions that caused the problem or because they could not understand their own contract
- Harry HOW i RECOVER MY LOST OR STOLEN FUNDS:You should gather and document all relevant details about the theft, such as transaction IDs, wallet addresses, and any communication with the scammer if any, and then proceed to message SYLVESTER. G. BRYANT to get back your lost/ stolen funds by sharing the evidence you've compiled. he was the only one who was able to recover my funds I was so surprised he got back my money worth $52k but glory be to God and all thanks to him.. here is his contact below: Instagram: Yt7crackerszEmail: Yt7crackersz@ gmail,com
- Daniel J I had read an article several years ago that one of the issues that workers were complaining about with this plant is that 1/3 of the workforce were temporary workers. They didn't have the same benefits as the other 2/3 of the employees. Will this improve this situation or make it worse? Do temporary workers get a vote?I honestly don't care as long as it is not a requirement to work at the plant.
- Kosmo Tragic. Where in the name of all that is holy did anybody get the idea that self-driving cars were a good idea? I get the desire for lane-keeping, and use it myself, occasionally, but I don't even like to look across the car at my passenger while driving, let along relinquish complete control.
- Bof65705611 There’s one of these around the corner from me. It still runs…driven daily, in fact. That fact always surprises me.
Comments
Join the conversation
Aside from dreams of revenue, why do politicians OK the cameras? 1. They think we like the cameras! Last week a blog exposed Astroturf Lobbying in the red light cam Industry. (To read it, Google Rynski and Astroturf.) Astroturf Lobbying is when a PR firm manufactures a fake grassroots movement via comments posted on news articles like this one. The politicians, sensing strong community support (they read these comment columns too), give the OK for cameras. 2. Politicians - and their extended family - are immune to the tickets. In California 1.5 million privately-owned cars have plate numbers protected from easy look up, effectively invisible to agencies trying to process red light camera violations. Such "protected plate" lists exist in other states, too. (In CA the list includes local politicians, bureaucrats, retired cops, other govt. employees, and their families and ADULT children!) In each state, someone should check to see who and how many are 'protected.'