McGee v. The City of Hercules

Background

Anthony McGee filed two motions seeking sanctions—court-imposed penalties—against defendants City of Hercules and Hercules Police Department, and against Dale Allen Jr., counsel of record for a defendant. The court decided the motions without oral argument.

First Motion

McGee asked the court to take judicial notice of several documents, including documents from a prior related criminal case, two state-court minute orders, and a letter from the Milpitas Police Department. The court declined each request. It found that the criminal-case filings were argumentative and subject to reasonable dispute. It also found that the other documents were not sufficiently described or authenticated, so the court could not determine whether judicial notice was proper.

McGee sought sanctions against defense counsel for allegedly disseminating juvenile court records in violation of California Welfare and Institutions Code section 827. The court found that he did not explain which records were involved, how defendants allegedly disclosed them, to whom they were disclosed, or when. Because the motion did not state the grounds for sanctions with enough detail, the court denied the first motion.

Second Motion

McGee sought sanctions against Dale Allen Jr. under the court’s inherent authority and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 11. He argued that Allen or people working under Allen’s direction had publicly filed juvenile records protected by California law. McGee contended that the filing risked public shame and reputational harm and violated equal-protection rights under the Fourteenth Amendment.

The court explained that sanctions under its inherent authority generally require bad faith or conduct equivalent to bad faith; recklessness alone is not enough unless combined with an additional factor such as frivolousness, harassment, or an improper purpose. Rule 11 requires attorneys to certify that their filings have factual and legal support and are not made for an improper purpose. The court also noted that a Rule 11 motion generally must be served 21 days before being filed so the opposing party has an opportunity to correct or withdraw the challenged filing. McGee provided no declaration, proof of service, or other evidence showing compliance with that 21-day safe-harbor requirement.

The court found that the second motion did not provide an adequate basis for sanctions under either the court’s inherent authority or Rule 11. The court separately found that McGee’s motions provided a basis to seal juvenile records publicly filed in the litigation because California law makes juvenile records confidential.

Ruling

Judge Thomas S. Hixson denied McGee’s first and second motions for sanctions. The court also ordered McGee to file a motion to seal the juvenile records he believes were unlawfully disseminated, identifying the specific records by electronic filing number and, when applicable, page number. The order did not itself impose sanctions or state that the records had already been sealed.