Cal. Codes » Civil Code / DIVISION 1. PERSONS / PART 2. PERSONAL RIGHTS
California Codes

Cal. Civil Code § 47.5 (2026)

Personal Rights

✓ leginfo export of Sept. 26, 2026 (applied Oct. 1, 2026)
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section CA-LEGleginfo.legislature.ca.gov JustiaCode on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

Notwithstanding Section 47, a peace officer may bring an action for defamation against an individual who has filed a complaint with that officer’s employing agency alleging misconduct, criminal conduct, or incompetence, if that complaint is false, the complaint was made with knowledge that it was false and that it was made with spite, hatred, or ill will. Knowledge that the complaint was false may be proved by a showing that the complainant had no reasonable grounds to believe the statement was true and that the complainant exhibited a reckless disregard for ascertaining the truth.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 9 cases, 1999–2017 · leading case: People v. Stanistreet, 58 P.3d 465 (Cal. 2002).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
People v. Stanistreet, 58 P.3d 465 (Cal. 2002). · cites it 2× “[6] Civil Code section 47.5 provides, as relevant, that "a peace officer may bring an action for defamation against an individual who has filed a complaint with that officer's employing agency alleging misconduct, criminal conduct, or incompetence, if that complaint is false,…”
Siam v. Kizilbash, 130 Cal. App. 4th 1563 (Cal. Ct. App. 2005). “Like Penal Code section 11172(a), therefore, Civil Code section 47.5 makes a person liable for a communication that would otherwise be protected by the litigation privilege.”
Gritchen v. Collier, 73 F. Supp. 2d 1148 (C.D. Cal. 1999). · cites it 5× “The Court finds California Civil Code § 47.5, specially authorizing a defamation action by a police officer targeted by a citizen's false complaint, is unconstitutional.”
Publius v. Boyer-Vine, 237 F. Supp. 3d 997 (E.D. Cal. 2017). “After the police department “found no misconduct,” Collier, through his attorney, sent Gritchen a letter threatening to bring suit for defamation under California Civil Code § 47.5, which permits peace officers to bring defamation actions against someone who files a false…”
Haddad v. Wall, 107 F. Supp. 2d 1230 (C.D. Cal. 2000). · cites it 2× “BACKGROUND Haddad is challenging the constitutionality of California Civil Code § 47.5 (“Section 47.”
Hamilton v. City of San Bernardino, 107 F. Supp. 2d 1239 (C.D. Cal. 2000). “6 is unconstitutional is an issue of first impression.”
Haddad v. State of Cal., 64 F. Supp. 2d 930 (C.D. Cal. 1999). “On December 29,1997, Officer Wall filed a complaint, pursuant to California Civil Code § 47.5 (“section 47.”
Gritchen v. Collier, 73 F. Supp. 2d 1148 (C.D. Cal. 1999). · cites it 4× “The Court finds California Civil Code § 47.5, specially authorizing a defamation action by a police officer targeted by a citizen’s false complaint, is unconstitutional.”
People v. Stanistreet, 93 Cal. App. 4th 469 (Cal. Ct. App. 2002). “6, Civil Code section 47.5 treated citizen complaints against police officers differently from complaints against all other government officers and thus made an impermissible content-based discrimination against a type of speech.”
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.