From our private database of 35,600+ case briefs...
Fair Political Practices Commission v. Suitt
California Court of Appeal
90 Cal. App. 3d 125 (1979)
Michael O’Key was an employee of the Caucus, an association of members of the California Assembly. O’Key’s salary was paid by the state. In 1976 O’Key was allowed to disregard some of his normal duties to work for the Suitt Committee (the committee) (defendant), a political campaign working for the reelection of Assemblyman Tom Suitt (defendant). O’Key spent at least three days in May and June of 1976 working for the committee, soliciting campaign funds, preparing the budget, and organizing volunteers. O’Key did not receive any payment from Suitt or the committee, instead receiving his full salary from the state. Neither Suitt nor the committee reimbursed the state for work done by O’Key. The California Political Reform Act (the act) required campaigns to make disclosures of contributions made to and distributions made from the campaign. Under the act, contributions included nonmonetary donations such as work done for the campaign for political purposes. If an employer allowed an employee to volunteer his compensated time to the campaign, the campaign had to report the employee’s compensation as if the employer had donated the money to the campaign for the campaign to pay the employee. The committee did not disclose the work O’Key performed for the campaign. The committee reasoned that the work done on campaigns by employees of the Caucus did not have to be disclosed under the act, because all work that the Caucus’s employees did was for political purposes. The Fair Political Practices Commission (plaintiff) filed a lawsuit in state court against Suitt and the committee, asking the court to compel the committee to make its required disclosures related to O’Key’s campaign work. The trial court ruled in favor of the committee. The Fair Political Practices Commission appealed.
Rule of Law
Holding and Reasoning (Paras, J.)
What to do next…
Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.
You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 618,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.Unlock this case briefRead our student testimonials
Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.
Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee
Here's why 618,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 35,600 briefs, keyed to 984 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.