Petrella v. Metro-Goldwin-Mayer, Inc. (2014) 134 S.Ct. 1962 did not abrogate the rule that the 3-year statute of limitations for copyright infringement in modified by the discovery to allow suit within 3 years of the date when the plaintiff first knew or reasonably should have known of the infringement. Read More
A judgment is not one "on the merits" entitled to claim or issue preclusive effect if the appeal from the judgment is dismissed solely on the ground that the appeal is moot due to post-judgment events--such as, in this case, completion of the development project that allegedly violated zoning of CEQA requirements. See also Coalition for a Sustainable Future in… Read More
Plaintiff, a jewelry store, stated a viable breach of contract action against Sotheby's. Plaintiff owned $4 million in diamonds which it had obtained from Rechnitz as security for his debt. Plaintiff and Rechnitz met with a Sotheby's agent, giving him the diamonds to have appraised for possible auction at Sotheby's. Sotheby's form contract referred to only a single consignor, but… Read More
Plaintiff sued insurer #1, claiming it owed a duty to defend him against a suit by a conservation land trust that he had violated the trust's conservation easement over his land by various development activities he undertook on the property. That suit resulted in a judgment for the insurer, affirmed on appeal, denying coverage on the ground that the suit… Read More
Plaintiff leased a commercial property from defendant. The lease gave plaintiff an option to buy the property at its fair market value. Plaintiff exercised the option but the parties disagreed about the fair market value. After much litigation, the trial court set the price and ordered the parties to perform, but before they could do so, the Department of Transportation… Read More
On remand after reversal of an order dismissing the complaint (Sicre De Fontbrune v. Wolfsy (9th Cir. 2016) 838 F.3d 992), this decision reverses a summary judgment in defendant's favor refusing to enforce a French judgment for "astreinte" damages for using photos of Picasso paintings infringing plaintiff's copyright in the photos. The French judgment that plaintiff sought to enforce was… Read More
In international diversity cases, enforceability of judgments of courts of other countries is generally governed by the law of the state in which enforcement is sought. Read More
Plaintiff lacked Article III standing to challenge the FTC's opinion letter which took the position that use of soundboard technology on collection calls involved use of prerecorded messages that violated the FTC Telemarketing Sales Rule. The complaint did not allege that plaintiff had any concrete plans to violate the FTC's new interpretation of its Telemarketing Sales Rule. Read More
The district court dismissed plaintiff's complaint without prejudice, acknowledging that amendment might not be futile. Nevertheless, the district court did not grant leave to amend and entered judgment the same day against plaintiff. This decision holds that, viewing the record as a whole, the district court intended to end the case, making its dismissal order final and appealable even though… Read More
Bucking the trend and disagreeing with United Talent Agency v. Vigilant Ins. Co. (2022) 77 Cal.App.5th 821, this decision holds that the trial court erred in sustaining the insurer's motion to dismiss this suit seeking coverage under a CGL policy's business interruption coverage for losses sustained by reason of COVID-19. It reasons that however improbable it may now seem, on… Read More
Recognizing a divergence of opinions on this point, this decision follows Rice v. Crow (2000) 81 Cal.App.4th 725 and Le Parc Community Assn. v. Workers’ Comp. Appeals Bd. (2003) 110 Cal.App.4th 1161 in holding that the bare voluntary pre-trial dismissal of a lawsuit (pursant to settlement with less than all defendants) with prejudice does not result in the “actual litigation”… Read More
The district court erred in certifying a plaintiff class in this case challenging defendant's classification of its property preservation workers as independent contractors and asserting claims for overtime pay and expense reimbursement. Plaintiffs could not prove fact of damage--not just amount of damage--by common evidence since some class members had not worked overtime or incurred reimbursable business expenses. The district… Read More
This decision reverses a punitive damage award against a supplier of talc to the manufacturer of Old Spice talcum powder. Defendant did not contest the jury's verdicts finding that plaintiff contracted mesothelioma from the asbestos in the talcum powder and that defendant was negligent in failing to detect and warn consumers about its presence in the product. However, there was… Read More
The trial court correctly denied defendant's motion for reconsideration of its order granting the judgment creditor the right to execute on defendants' IRA and ERISA plan interest because the motion failed to cite new facts or law. However, the trial court then properly exercised its inherent authority to reconsider its order because the reconsideration motion brought to its attention the… Read More
In a case with facts closely similar to Ford Motor Co. v. Montana Eighth Judicial Dist. Court (2021) 141 S.Ct. 1017, the court follows that decision in holding that Daimler was subject to personal jurisdiction in California even though Daimler had not sold the truck involved in the accident in this state nor did the accident occur here. Daimler purposefully… Read More
Following County of San Mateo v. Chevron Corp. (9th Cir. 2022) 32 F.4th 733, this decision affirms an order remanding this climate change public nuisance suit against major oil companies to state court. Read More
Summary judgment was properly granted to defendant in this 10b-5 suit that came after a dramatic decline in Align's stock price following an abrupt decrease in its sales growth in China. The abrupt decline in sale growth which came only three months after positive remarks by Align's management and was unexplained by other external events was sufficient to give rise… Read More
The trial court correctly granted defendant summary judgment in this slip-and-fall injury suit in an exercise facility's sauna room. The release of claims in the fitness center's membership agreement absolved the fitness center of liability for ordinary negligence. Plaintiff failed to submit evidence creating a triable issue of fact as to gross negligence. She claimed to have fallen because the… Read More
In this PAGA suit, the original plaintiff died while the suit was pending. This decision holds that the trial court correctly denied a different employee's motion to intervene in the action in place of the deceased plaintiff because the would-be plaintiff was not an employee at the time the original plaintiff sent her complaint to the DLSE and therefore would… Read More
A PAGA suit is not a class action and need not satisfy Rule 23 requirements, including the requirement of manageability. In light of PAGA's structure and purpose, imposing a manageability requirement in PAGA cases akin to that imposed under Rule 23(b)(3) would not constitute a reasonable response to a specific problem and would contradict California law by running afoul of… Read More
