A lawyer requested documents under the California Public Records Act [CPRA, Government Code §6250 et seq.], and the County argued the records were not subject to disclosure because they were attorney-client communications, they were attorney-work product and they were exempt under the CPRA’s pending litigation exemption [§6254(b)]. After ordering the County to redact certain portions of its billing records, the trial court granted the lawyer’s petition for writ of mandate. The appellate court affirmed, noting the redacted records excluded work product information, they were part of normal record keeping to facilitate the payment of attorney fees and members of the public have a right to inspect public records. County of Los Angeles v. Sup. Ct. (Cynthia Anderson-Barker) (Cal. App. Second Dist., Div. 8; November 16, 2012) 211 Cal.App.4th 57.