Skip to Content (Press Enter)

Skip to Nav (Press Enter)

Civil Procedure

The following summaries are of recent published decisions of the California appellate courts, the Ninth Circuit, and the United States Supreme Court. The summaries are presented without regard to whether Severson & Werson represented a party in the case.

Subscribe to California Appellate Tracker

Thank you for your desire to subscribe to Severson & Werson’s Appellate Tracker Weblog. In order to subscribe, you must provide a valid name and e-mail address. This too will be retained on our server. When you push the “subscribe button”, we will send an electronic mail to the address that you provided asking you to confirm your subscription to our Weblog. By pushing the “subscribe button”, you represent and warrant that you are over the age of 18 years old, are the owner/authorized user of that e-mail address, and are entitled to receive e-mails at that address. Our weblog will retain your name and e-mail address on its server, or the server of its web host. However, we won’t share any of this information with anyone except the Firm’s employees and contractors, except under certain extraordinary circumstances described on our Privacy Policy and (About The Consumer Finance Blog/About the Appellate Tracker Weblog) Page. NOTICE AND AGREEMENT REGARDING E-MAILS AND CALLS/TEXT MESSAGES TO LAND-LINE AND WIRELESS TELEPHONES: By providing your contact information and confirming your subscription in response to the initial e-mail that we send you, you agree to receive e-mail messages from Severson & Werson from time-to-time and understand and agree that such messages are or may be sent by means of automated dialing technology. If you have your email forwarded to other electronic media, including text messages and cellular telephone by way of VoIP, internet, social media, or otherwise, you agree to receive my messages in that way. This may result in charges to you. Your agreement and consent also extend to any other agents, affiliates, or entities to whom our communications are forwarded. You agree that you will notify Severson & Werson in writing if you revoke this agreement and that your revocation will not be effective until you notify Severson & Werson in writing. You understand and agree that you will afford Severson & Werson a reasonable time to unsubscribe you from the website, that the ability to do so depends on Severson & Werson’s press of business and access to the weblog, and that you may still receive one or more emails or communications from weblog until we are able to unsubscribe you.

An attorney for plaintiff was found to have reviewed two of defendant's arguably attorney-client privileged documents without stopping and notifying the defendant when he realized the documents might be privileged.  However, the trial court abused its discretion in disqualifying the plaintiff's law firm as a result.  The trial court failed to say how the two documents could be used to… Read More

Bradley moved under CCP 473(d) to void the dismissal of its cross-complaint on the ground that the dismissal was entered under a settlement that Bradley's attorney had entered into without Bradley's consent.  Recognizing a split of appellate authority over whether a judgment on a settlement entered into without client consent is void or merely voidable and suggesting that voidable is… Read More

The trial court did not abuse its discretion in holding that plaintiff could not have validly entered into a contract with an arbitration clause when the contract was 21 pages, the review period was 38 seconds and through a cell phone, and plaintiff was 81 years old with virtually no technological ability. Furthermore, plaintiff's income was limited; she was careful… Read More

When a party has waived the right to a jury trial by one of the acts or omissions listed in CCP 631, it may still seek relief from that waiver under CCP 631(g).  A trial court exercises discretion in ruling on such a motion and need not grant the motion merely because granting the motion will not cause hardship to… Read More

Choice of law clauses in maritime contracts are presumptively enforceable as a matter of federal admiralty law just as forum selection clauses in those contracts are generally enforceable.  Choice of law clauses in maritime contracts are unenforceable only when they contravene a federal statute or conflict with established federal maritime policy or when the parties cannot furnish a reasonable basis… Read More

Plaintiff tried to refinance her Wells Fargo home loan with another lender but that effort was thwarted by a fraudulent third party's lien on the property.  Plaintiff contends that Wells Fargo should have helped her remove the fraudulent lien, but instead it started foreclosure proceedings on her loan.  She filed a Chapter 13 bankruptcy to avoid the foreclosure and listed… Read More

This decision affirms a JNOV in a case where plaintiff was injured by two dogs kept by a subtenant in a building owned by the defendant landlord.  The decision finds that the trial court was correct in holding that there was no substantial evidence that the landlord actually knew of the dogs' dangerous propensities.  The landlord's receipt of an email… Read More

Under 28 USC 1292(a)(3), a federal court of appeals has jurisdiction over appeals from a district court's interlocutory decree determining the rights and liabilities of the parties to the admiralty cases in which appeals from final decrees are allowed.  This decision holds that the provision allows an interlocutory appeal from an order denying summary judgment based on the waiver the… Read More

Under 9 USC 9, a notice of motion to confirm an arbitration award may be served on a party resident in the forum district by the means used to serve an ordinary motion.  If the party is not a resident of the forum district, service must be by the marshall of the district in which the party resides, in the… Read More

9 USC 203 vests federal district courts with subject matter jurisdiction over motions seeking to confirm non-domestic arbitral awards.  Non-domestic arbitral awards include all arbitral awards involving at least one foreign party.  Since Gussi was a Mexican corporation, the district court had jurisdiction to hear Voltage's motion to confirm the arbitration award against Gussi. Read More

Under Gov. Code 12965(b), (c)(6), the award of attorney fees and costs to a prevailing defendant in a FEHA case is discretionary but governed by the rule that the defendant may recover fees and costs only when the claim was frivolous.  This decision holds that since the trial court must exercise its discretion, the prevailing defendant cannot claim costs by… Read More

28 USC 1367(d) provides that the statute of limitations on any claim within a federal court's supplemental jurisdiction (and any other claim that is voluntarily dismissed at the same time) is tolled for 30 days after the supplemental jurisdiction claim is dismissed.  This decision holds that the 30 day tolling provision applies only when the supplemental jurisdiction claim is involuntarily… Read More

Disagreeing with Hardy v. America's Best Home Loans (2014) 232 Cal.App.4th 795 and Gray v. La Salle Bank (2023) 94 Cal.App.5th 1215, this split decision holds that Fed. R. Civ. P. 41's two dismissal rule bars later litigation in state court even if limited to state law claims so long as the second dismissal was in federal court on a… Read More

The trial court correctly denied enforcement of the employer's arbitration agreement.  The arbitration agreement was procedurally unconscionable both because it was an adhesion contract in the employment context and because the way it was presented to the prospective employee for electronic signature made it difficult for her to read before signing.  The agreement was substantively unconscionable in containing a confidentiality… Read More

An appellate court may affirm on any ground supported by the record (J.B. Aguerre, Inc. v. American Guarantee & Liability Ins. Co. (1997) 59 Cal.App.4th 6, 15-16), including grounds not raised by the respondent, and even if the respondent does not file a brief (Fleming Distribution Co. v. Younan (2020) 49 Cal.App.5th 73, 84, fn. 8; Smith v. Smith (2012)… Read More

If a jury instruction contains “an incorrect statement of law, the party harmed by that instruction need not have objected to the instruction or proposed a correct instruction of his [or her] own in order to preserve the right to complain of the erroneous instruction on appeal." Read More

On remand from the US Supreme Court, the Ninth Circuit applies California's governmental interest approach to conflicts of law questions.  It finds a true conflict between Spanish law which allows the possessor of stolen art to acquire stronger title to the art than its predecessor in interest had by reason of the passage of the prescriptive period and California law… Read More

The district court abused its discretion in denying class certification of a claim that defendant violated California labor laws by requiring employees to remain on premises during rest breaks.  The evidence showed that defendant enforced that policy consistently across all its employees, making the claim suitable for class certification.  However, the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying… Read More

1 2 3 4 5 59