Factual and Procedural Background
The provided opinion is captioned Blatty v. New York Times Co., from the Court of Appeal of California, dated 1985. The text of the opinion consists of a procedural notation: "REVIEW GRANTED." It states that the opinion was reprinted without change at 184 Cal.App.3d 1144 to permit tracking pending review by the Supreme Court.
Legal Issues Presented
The opinion addresses a procedural matter and does not frame distinct legal issues.
Arguments of the Parties
The opinion does not contain a detailed account of the parties' legal arguments.
Table of Precedents Cited
No precedents were cited in the provided opinion.
Court's Reasoning and Analysis
The document is a brief procedural entry rather than an opinion containing substantive legal analysis. Its stated purpose is administrative: the opinion was reprinted without change to allow tracking of the matter while review is pending before the Supreme Court. No step-by-step legal analysis or application of legal principles to facts is provided in the text.
Holding and Implications
REVIEW GRANTED; opinion reprinted for tracking
Direct effect: the Court of Appeal's opinion was reprinted at 184 Cal.App.3d 1144 and the case is noted as pending review by the Supreme Court. The opinion itself does not discuss broader legal implications; accordingly, no new precedent is indicated in the provided text.
Show full summary ...