California Codes
Cal. Government Code § 820.2 (2026)
✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
CA-LEGleginfo.legislature.ca.gov
JustiaCode on Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
Except as otherwise provided by statute, a public employee is not liable for an injury resulting from his act or omission where the act or omission was the result of the exercise of the discretion vested in him, whether or not such discretion be abused.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 313
cases (103 in the last 5 years), 1964–2026 · leading case: Merritt Sharp, III v. Cnty. of Orange, 871 F.3d 901 (9th Cir. 2017).
Merritt Sharp, III v. Cnty. of Orange, 871 F.3d 901 (9th Cir. 2017). “The panel held that two immunities – “discretionary” immunity under Cal. Gov. Code § 820.2 and “prosecutorial” immunity under Cal.”
James Steinle v. City & Cnty. of S.F., 919 F.3d 1154 (9th Cir. 2019). “The Panel held that the Sheriff’s issuance of the Memo was a discretionary act that was entitled to immunity under California Government Code section 820.2.”
Liberal v. Estrada, 632 F.3d 1064 (9th Cir. 2011). “[5] The officers contended that they were immune from those state-law claims because they have discretionary immunity under California Government Code section 820.2, which states: "Except as otherwise provided by statute, a public employee is not liable for an injury resulting…”
Michael Hampton v. State of California, 83 F.4th 754 (9th Cir. 2023). “We previously held that one of the immunities in the Government Claims Act, Cal. Gov. Code § 820.2 , was an immunity from suit.”
Gary Blankenhorn v. City of Orange Andy Romero Dung Nguyen Garrett Ross Tamara South Gray, Sergeant Montano, Officer Kayano, Officer Roman, Officer, 485 F.3d 463 (9th Cir. 2007). “100 First, Defendants' argue that the arresting officers cannot be held liable for Blankenhorn's remaining state law claims under California Government Code section 820.2.”
Williams v. State of California, 664 P.2d 137 (Cal. 1983). “" The case need not be decided on the basis of either extreme: there is ample authority for a moderate position which recognizes the duty that does exist but *29 gives effect to the legislative intent that a public employee and his employer have immunity from civil liability for…”
AE Ex Rel. Hernandez v. Cnty. of Tulare, 666 F.3d 631 (9th Cir. 2012). “As long as AE is permitted to allege that County employees were negligent, he must also be permitted to allege that the County is derivatively liable pursuant to California Government Code § 815.2(a). On appeal, the County argues that the dismissal was proper because AE’s…”
Adams v. City of Fremont, 80 Cal. Rptr. 2d 196 (Cal. Ct. App. 1999). “) The police are additionally protected by statutory immunities generally applicable to public entities and their employees, including immunity for discretionary acts (Gov.Code §§ 820.2, 815.2, subd. (b)) and for failure to enforce the law (Gov.”
Johnson v. State of California, 447 P.2d 352 (Cal. 1968). “" (Gov. Code, § 820.2.) We shall next explain that the statutory provision granting immunity for any "injury resulting from determining .”
Hernandez v. City of San Jose, 241 F. Supp. 3d 959 (N.D. Cal. 2017). “As to Plaintiffs’ negligence claims, the City Defendants argue that the City is immune under California Government Code § 820.2. The Court considers these arguments in turn.”
Gillan v. City of San Marino, 55 Cal. Rptr. 3d 158 (Cal. Ct. App. 2007). “Government Code Section 820.2 Provides No Defense to the Count for Violation of Civil Code Section 52.”
Lugtu v. California High. Patrol, 28 P.3d 249 (Cal. 2001). “Code, §§ 21000-23336), and by making police officers statutorily immune for their decision to stop a suspected traffic violator (Gov. Code, § 820.2; Sparks, supra, 64 Cal.”
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.