Civil Procedure

Following White v. Square, Inc. (2019) 7 Cal.5th 1019, this decision holds that the trial court did not err in instructing the jury and in submitting a special verdict form to them which required plaintiff to prove that she intended to use Omni Hotel's services by booking a reservation or use the website to ascertain Omni's prices and availability for… Read More

An action under San Francisco's Tree Dispute Resolution Ordinance about a neighbor's tree that has grown to obstruct the plaintiff's view is an action in the nature of one for a continuing nuisance, even though obstruction of view by trees was not actionable at common law.  Accordingly, there is no statute of limitations on such an action since the harm… Read More

This decision affirms dismissal of plaintiff's complaint on judicial estoppel grounds.  In prior litigation over the same award of rights to assign .africa URLs, plaintiff took the position before an international arbitration panel that plaintiff could not sue in court over the award.  That position was completely inconsistent with its current assertion of the right to sue in court over… Read More

Ordinarily, when a complaint alleges a stand-alone claim for declaratory relief and properly alleges the existence of an existing controversy, the trial court should not grant a demurrer because the plaintiff is entitled to a declaration of rights even if unfavorable.  However, the error is not prejudicial if the declaration would be in the defendant's favor.  The appellate opinion affirming… Read More

In a direct listing, the issuing company files a registration statement with the SEC which then allows it to sell its registered shares directly to the public and allows its existing shareholders to do so as well.  Since direct listing does not involve bank financing of the issuance, there is no "lock up" period during which unregistered shares cannot be… Read More

When a lawyer's advice is sought for both business purposes (such as tax compliance) and legal advice (advice on tax law), whether the communications are attorney-client privileged or not is tested by the "primary purpose" test--was the primary purpose of the communication legal or business advice?  (The court expressly declines to decide whether legal advice being "a" rather than "the"… Read More

Plaintiff voluntarily dismissed its misappropriation of trade secrets claim, but continued to prosecute six other causes of action against defendant.  Defendant moved unsuccessfully for an attorney fee award under Civ. Code 3426.4 which allows fee awards for trade secrets claims brought in bad faith.  Defendant's appeal from the order denying its fee motion was dismissed.  The order was not a… Read More

This decision holds that the district court erred in denying Comcast's motion to compel arbitration even though its arbitration clause precluded customers from litigating public injunction claims in any forum.  First, the decision holds that the mere presence of the clause in the arbitration agreement does not automatically invalidate the arbitration agreement for all purposes--but rather only in cases that… Read More

Applying Martinez v. Combs (2010) 49 Cal.4th 35 regarding the definition of employer under IWC orders, this decision affirms a summary judgment finding that a bail bond surety company is not the employer of bail bondsmen's fugitive recovery personnel.  The surety company did not hire, fire or exercise control over those personnel.  The surety company's contracts with the bail bondsmen… Read More

In Law v. Siegel (2014) 571 U.S. 415, the US Supreme Court held that a bankruptcy court may not use its equitable powers under 11 USC 105 to contravene express provisions of the Bankruptcy Code.  Applying that reasoning, this decision departs from prior Ninth Circuit precedent, In re Rosson (9th Cir. 2008) 545 F.3d 764, and holds that a bankruptcy… Read More

While CCP 1033.5(b)(3) generally disallows an award of costs for the expense of photocopying, section 1033.5(a)(13) allows an award of costs for preparation of exhibits "if reasonably helpful to aid the trier of fact."  This decision holds that "trier of fact" refers to any resolution by judge or jury of facts, whether on motion or at trial.  So the cost… Read More

A provision in an attorney's contingency fee agreement that purported to allow the attorney to consent on the client's behalf (and over the client's objection) to any settlement offer that the attorney thought was reasonable and in the client's best interest violated the Rules of Professional Conduct and was void.  Such a provision creates an immediate, direct conflict of interest… Read More

Gov. Code 53069.4 allows local governments to enforce their ordinances through an administrative process for imposing and collecting fines.  Unlike most administrative proceedings that may be reviewed only by a writ of administrative mandamus under CCP 1094.5, a citizen can appeal to the superior court from a decision by that administrative process within 20 days after the decision. (Gov. Code… Read More

Defendant was subject to specific personal jurisdiction in California though he was not an officer of dmarcian USA and demarcian EU, for which he worked, was a separate entity.  By publicly presenting himself as a leader of dmarcian, a company headquartered in California, having dmarcian EU’s web address automatically route to dmarcian’s Web site, administered in California, and receiving prospective… Read More

Interpreting a nondisclosure agreement under English law, this decision holds that a clause stating that "this agreement shall terminate on a date 2 years from the date hereof" ended the entire agreement after two years, including the defendant's obligation not to disclose the trade secret information it had learned from plaintiff during the existence of the agreement.  This interpretation was… Read More

Under Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(k)(2), when the plaintiff sues on a federal cause of action and the defendant is not subject to personal jurisdiction in any state's courts of general jurisdiction, the federal courts may exercise personal jurisdiction over the defendant if it has minimum contacts with the United States as a whole under the same generally applicable tests… Read More

This decision holds that an order directing the defendant to pay half the costs of certain depositions to determine the number of additional depositions needed to obtain a reliable statistical sample of the class of employees suing for missed meal and rest breaks is not appealable under the collateral order doctrine.  Though the order directed the payment of money and… Read More

California could not exercise specific personal jurisdiction over a Virginia law firm and its lawyers.  The lawyers had done nothing to avail themselves of California's benefits.  They had a website with minimum interactivity not directed to California residents in particular but rather to veterans throughout the country.  The lawyers had Virginia bar licenses, not California ones.  Though plaintiff (their client)… Read More

Under CCP 338(a), a three-year limitations period applies to an action on a liability created by statute other than a penalty or forfeiture.  This decision holds that the commencement of the three year period under section 338(a) can be tolled under the common law delayed discovery rule. Read More

Under CCP 361, if the claim arose in a foreign state and is barred by that state's statute of limitations, it is barred in California unless the plaintiff has been a citizen of California continuously from the accrual of the claim to the present and held the cause of action the whole time.  Here, Louisiana citizens sued for injuries sustained… Read More