Cal. Codes » Civil Code
California Codes

Cal. Civil Code § 1798 (2026)

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section CA-LEGleginfo.legislature.ca.gov JustiaCode on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

This chapter shall be known and may be cited as the Information Practices Act of 1977.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 91 cases (34 in the last 5 years), 1980–2026 · leading case: People v. Suarez, 471 P.3d 509 (Cal. 2020).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
People v. Suarez, 471 P.3d 509 (Cal. 2020). “24 of the Information Practices Act of 1977 (Civ. Code, § 1798 et seq.) prohibits agencies from disclosing “personal information in a manner that would link the 85 PEOPLE v.”
Perkey v. Dep't of Motor Vehs., 721 P.2d 50 (Cal. 1986). · cites it 4× “(Civ. Code, § 1798 et seq.) [6] The Act delineates an elaborate statutory scheme specifically designed to implement the privacy amendment.”
Lachtman v. Regents of Univ. of California, 70 Cal. Rptr. 3d 147 (Cal. Ct. App. 2007). · cites it 2× “VIOLATION OF PRIVACY RIGHTS (CAUSE OF ACTION 1) Lachtman argues the trial court erred by ruling against him on his claim for violation of privacy rights under the California Constitution and the Information Practices Act of 1977(IPA) (Civ.Code, § 1798 et seq.). [4] In cause of…”
Am. Civil Liberties Union Found. of N. California, Inc. v. Deukmejian, 651 P.2d 822 (Cal. 1982). · cites it 2× “Amicus calls our attention to a definition of "confidential information" in the Information Practices Act of 1977 (Civ. Code, § 1798 et seq.). That definition includes as "confidential" all information compiled by law enforcement agencies "for the purpose of a criminal…”
State Dep't of Pub. Health v. Superior Court, 342 P.3d 1217 (Cal. 2015). “The Information Practices Act of 1977 does not apply to records that are disclosable “[pjursuant to the California Public Records Act.” (Civ. Code, § 1798.24, subd.”
Comm'n on Peace Officer Standards & Training v. Superior Court, 165 P.3d 462 (Cal. 2007). “(a) [defining “ ‘personal information,’ ” for purposes of the Information Practices Act of 1977 (Civ. Code, § 1798 et seq.), as “any information that is maintained by an agency that identifies or describes an individual, including, but not limited to, his or her name, social…”
CBS Broad. Inc. v. Superior Court, 2001 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 7304 (Cal. Ct. App. 2001). · cites it 2× “” DSS also asserted disclosure was prohibited under the Information Practices Act of 1977 (Civ. Code, § 1798 et seq.) in that disclosure of the fact an individual had a criminal record exemption would “identify the person and unjustifiably intrude on that person’s privacy” and…”
Burden v. Snowden, 828 P.2d 672 (Cal. 1992). “), the Information Practices Act of 1977 (Civ. Code, § 1798 et seq.) and Labor Code section 1198.”
Hurley v. Cal. Dep't of Parks & Rec., 229 Cal. Rptr. 3d 219 (Cal. Ct. App. 5th 2018). “), and a cause of action for violation of the Information Practices Act (IPA; Civ. Code, § 1798 et seq. 1 ) and additionally alleged causes of action against Seals only for intentional infliction of emotional distress (IIED) and negligent infliction of emotional distress (NIED).”
Pioneer Elec. (USA), Inc. v. Superior Court, 150 P.3d 198 (Cal. 2007). “), an act that contains legislative findings that “(a) The right to privacy is being threatened by the indiscriminate collection, maintenance, and dissemination of personal information and the lack of effective laws and legal remedies[;] Q] (b) The increasing use of computers…”
In re Adobe Sys., Inc. Privacy Litig., 66 F. Supp. 3d 1197 (N.D. Cal. 2014). “Code § 22576 , and the Information Practices Act (“IPA”), Cal. Civ. Code § 1798 et seq.). Adobe argues that none of these allegations are adequate to sustain a UCL claim.”
Alfaro v. Terhune, 2002 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 4289 (Cal. Ct. App. 2002). “(Civ. Code, § 1798 et seq.) Among other things, that act requires a public agency to limit the collection and retention of personal information to that necessary to accomplish the agency’s specific purpose, and restricts disclosure of such information.”
Show all 91 citing cases →
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.