In this 1980 case, the ACLU litigated on behalf of its own lobbyists, who received an administrative subpoena from the Franchise Tax Board (FTB) for records kept in connection with their work as lobbyists. The records of Brent Barnhart, Charles C. Marson and Mary Willans-Izett were requested and included material such as bank statements, invoices, and other accounting materials, appointment books, employment contracts, and any correspondence with other lobbyists, or state entities such as the Fair Political Practices Commission, Secretary of State, or Attorney General. The lobbyists refusal to comply with the subpoena eventually resulted in this lawsuit.

The case examines issues such as the appealability of subpoenas, and considers at length the Political Reform Act initiative of 1974. This act mandates that lobbyist activities should be regulated and their finances disclosed. The case also questions whether the Franchise Tax Board as an entity has the power to issue subpoenas, and finds that it gets this power from statutes that predate the Political Reform Act by 30 years. The court writes: "...although the Political Reform Act does not itself confer subpoena power on the FTB, it adds to the matters which are under the jurisdiction of the FTB and it increases the FTB's investigative arena." They conclude: "The order compelling compliance with the challenged subpoenas is vacated and the cause is remanded for reevaluation of the permissible scope of the subpoenas in light ofFair Political Practices Com. v. Superior Court, supra, 25 Cal. 3d 33."