The trial court erred in granting Staples summary judgment on plaintiff's Equal Pay Act claim under Lab. Code § 1197.5. Following federal cases, this decision holds that a plaintiff can establish a prima facie case of an Equal Pay Act violation by showing she was paid less than a single male comparator. It is not a defense to show that… Read More
Plaintiff, a public interest group that was not itself harmed, sued two immigration consultants who had posted statutory bonds issued by Hudson as required under the Immigration Consultant Act (Bus. & Prof. Code 22440 et seq.), seeking injunctive relief for violation of that act. This decision holds that plaintiff cannot recover its attorney fees from the surety, Hudson, because the… Read More
Following Sutter Health v. Superior Court (2014) 227 Cal.App.4th 1546, this decision holds that to state a claim under Civ. Code 556.36 and 56.101 for negligence in storing or disposing of medical information, the plaintiff must allege not just that the defendant negligently lost (or lost control of) confidential information about the plaintiff but also that the information was viewed… Read More
In a Workplace Violence Protective Order hearing, the trial court must allow the parties (and here, particularly the defendant) an opportunity to present any relevant evidence, including through cross-examination of the plaintiff's witness(es). Here, the trial court disallowed cross-examination, thus violating the defendant's due process rights and requiring reversal of the anti-harassment injunction. Read More
Doubling down on LaSalle v. Vogel (2019) 36 Cal.App.5th 127, this decision holds that plaintiff's counsel owes an ethical and legal obligation to notify the defendant's counsel (if known) of the defendant's failure to timely respond to the complaint and plaintiff's intention to seek a default. Here, plaintiff not only didn't notify defendant's counsel, but also arranged to serve the… Read More
A setoff under CCP 431.70 must be asserted as an affirmative defense in the answer to a complaint. A party may not assert a setoff under that section in a post-judgment motion. A judgment debtor may not use a non-statutory post-judgment motion as a means of obtaining an offset against the judgment based on disputed claims. Read More
This decision affirms an order enforcing a settlement agreement that resolved 20 medical malpractice actions--even though the agreement for liquidated damages of $50,000 per month up to a cap of $1.5 million if the defendant failed to timely pay the installments due under the $575,000 settlement amount. The opinion emphasizes that under Civ. Code 1781(b), which applies to contracts other… Read More
Plaintiff came to defendant's emergency room and was given an MRI without first checking to see if he had metal implants. He did and was burned as a result of the procedure. This decision affirms JNOV on plaintiff's elder abuse claim. Plaintiff could not show a case of "neglect" since defendant did not have care or custody of plaintiff. The… Read More
The communicable disease extension of the comprehensive property insurance policy that Fireman's issued to Amy's provided coverage for the costs of remediating, cleaning, disinfecting, etc. the premises after a communicable disease event, defined to mean “an event in which a public health authority has ordered that a location be evacuated, decontaminated, or disinfected due to the outbreak of a communicable… Read More
Following Sonner v. Premier Nutrition Corp. (9th Cir. 2020) 971 F.3d 834, this decision holds that even in a diverity case, a federal court may exercise equitable jurisdiction only if the plaintiff has no adequate legal remedy. Here, plaintiff's remedies under the UCL were all equitable, and the federal court lacked equitable jurisdiction over them because the CLRA offered the… Read More
Though it did most other things right, the district court erred in expressly employing the wrong standard to decide whether the class action settlement in this case was fair, just, and equitable. In a pre-certification settlement, like this one, the district court may not presume the settlement is reasonable but must instead exercise heightened scrutiny. Application of the wrong standard… Read More
The district court correctly dismissed this suit on claim preclusion grounds. A different environmental advocacy group had earlier brought suit in Oregon challenging the same Fish & Wildlife plan for bull trout. The Oregon district court dismissed the complaint with leave to amend. The plaintiff elected not to amend, instead appealing unsuccessfully. Then the current plaintiff sued to challenge the… Read More
This decision reverses a judgment for the employee in a suit for unpaid overtime wages because of a botched special verdict question regarding the employer's affirmative defense that the employee was an exempt executive under Wage Order No. 5. The question asked only if the employee spent more than 50% of her time on exempt duties. The question overemphasized the… Read More
Under CCP 473(d), a court may correct a clerical error in a judgment at any time. This decision holds that the trial court properly invoked that authority to correct the renewal of a judgment. The original judgment had been against Audrey Douglas in her capacity as administrator of Billy Joe Douglas' estate. The judgment creditor's application for renewal of the… Read More
This decision holds that the insured's original complaint failed to allege a covered business interruption loss due to COVID-19 stay-at-home orders. However, it also holds that it was error to deny the insured leave to amend since the demurrer had been sustained to the insured's original complaint, the insured requested leave to amend and described in some detail what additional… Read More
Following Arroyo v. Rosas (9th Cir. 2021) 19 F.4th 1202, this decision affirms the district court's order declining supplemental jurisdiction over Unruh Act claims in this disability discrimination case. California's procedural restrictions on disability discrimination suits under Civ. Code 52(a) and 55.56 are an exceptional circumstance warranting the refusal to exercise supplemental jurisdiction (which would allow plaintiffs the chance to… Read More
Good language requiring appellant to address in the opening brief arguments the respondent made in the trial court, even if not relied on by that court in entering the appealed order since the appellate court reviews the correctness of the appealed order not the reasons the trial court states for entering it. Read More
Under CCP 1987.2, a party that moves to quash a subpoena for that party's personal identifying information may recover attorney fees upon demonstrating (i) he prevailed on the motion to quash, (ii) the underlying action arises from the party's exercise of free speech rights on the Internet, and (iii) the plaintiff in that proceeding did not make a prima facie… Read More
The trial court erred in granting defendant summary judgment based on expiration of the statute of limitations (CCP 340.5) in this medical malpractice case arising from a stillbirth following an operation to turn the fetus to a head-down position for birth. There was a question of fact as to whether plaintiff subjectively suspected malpractice the day before delivering the stillborn… Read More
Neither claim nor issue preclusion applies when the prior judgment was obtained against a person acting in a different capacity than the capacity in which he brings the second suit, at least so long as the second suit is also brought on a different right. Here, the court applies that principle to hold that an arbitration award and judgment against… Read More
