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

Cal. Civil Code § 52.3 (2026)

Personal Rights

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

(a)No governmental authority, or agent of a governmental authority, or person acting on behalf of a governmental authority, shall engage in a pattern or practice of conduct by law enforcement officers that deprives any person of rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States or by the Constitution or laws of California.

(b)The Attorney General may bring a civil action in the name of the people to obtain appropriate equitable and declaratory relief to eliminate the pattern or practice of conduct specified in subdivision (a), whenever the Attorney General has reasonable cause to believe that a violation of subdivision (a) has occurred.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 4 cases (3 in the last 5 years), 2009–2023 · leading case: Cabral v. Cnty. of Glenn, 624 F. Supp. 2d 1184 (E.D. Cal. 2009).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Cabral v. Cnty. of Glenn, 624 F. Supp. 2d 1184 (E.D. Cal. 2009). · cites it 2× “Third Cause of Action: Claims Brought Pursuant to California Civil Code § 52.3 (“Bane Act”) Plaintiffs Third Cause of Action alleges Defendants violated Plaintiffs rights under California Civil Code § 52.”
Richter v. Ausmus (N.D. Cal. 2021). · cites it 3× “27 In each of these claims Richter also cites California Civil Code § 52.3 and California 1 multiple California courts have confirmed, California Civil Code § 52.”
First Amendment Coalition v. Super. Ct. (Cal. Ct. App. 2023). “(Civ. Code, § 52.3, subds. (a), (b).) A so-called “pattern-or-practice investigation” seeks to identify systemic violations of individuals’ civil rights and to provide remedial solutions through injunctive relief.”
Richter v. Ausmus (N.D. Cal. 2023). “1 and Cal. Civ. Code § 52.3 (a), Cal. 25 Gov. Code § 815.”
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.