Peter Kleidman v. Court of Appeal of California, Second Appellate District, et al.

California Rule of Court 8.1115(a), the “No­ citation Rule,” gives a California Court of Appeal the power to prohibit its decision from being cited as an authority in any other California court. Question 1. Is California’s No-citation Rule unconstitutional because it is substantively repugnant to due process? Question 2. Is California’s No-citation Rule unconstitutional because it is substantively repugnant to equal protection? Question 3. Did the Court of Appeal violate Kleidman’s right to due process by deciding a new rule of law adversely to Kleidman, while simultaneously invoking the No-citation Rule so that the new rule is not part of California law generally? Question 4. Did the Court of Appeal violate Kleidman’s right to equal protection by deciding a new rule of law adversely to Kleidman, while simultaneously invoking the No-citation Rule so that the new rule is not part of California law generally? Question 5. When a California Court of Appeal dismisses an appeal as untimely filed, sometimes the dismissal is decided with the concurrence of two justices whereas other times it is decided by a single justice. Is this classification - appeals dismissed as untimely with the concurrence of two justices vis-avis appeals dismissed as untimely by a single justice - violative of equal protection?