Civil Procedure

Under CCP 446(a), a defendant must file a verified answer to a complaint filed by the state, a county or certain other governmental agencies  “unless an admission of the truth of the complaint might subject the party to a criminal prosecution."  This decision holds that a defendant corporation is a "party" entitled to file an unverified answer under the quoted… Read More

This decision reverses an order granting defendants equitable relief from a default and default judgment.  A court’s ability to grant relief under its inherent equitable power is narrower than its ability to grant relief under CCP 473(b)  Equitable relief from a default judgment may be granted only in exceptional circumstances, and the party moving for such relief must make a… Read More

The trial court did not abuse its discretion in entering an in limine motion that effectively prevented plaintiff from presenting any evidence at trial.  Plaintiff had not complied with the superior court's local rule requiring an exchange of exhibits and witness lists a week before trial.  Also, plaintiff had not responded to defendant's written discovery or presented its witnesses for… Read More

The trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying plaintiff's oral motion to continue the trial presented at the start of what was scheduled to be the first day of trial.  Under Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.1332(b), a party seeking a continuance of a trial must do so by written motion or ex parte application with a supporting… Read More

Under Gov. Code 945.3, a person charged with a criminal offense may not bring a claim against a police officer or the police department relating to the charged offence, including any act or omission in the arrest or detention, while the criminal charges are pending in the superior court.  This decision holds that the statute tolls the statute of limitations… Read More

This decision refuses to enforce a Utah choice of law clause in a credit card agreement, the credit card having been used to buy a motorcycle in California.  While the choice of Utah law was reasonable since that is where the card issuer was located, application of Utah law would offend fundamental California public policy as expressed in McGill v.… Read More

Jury verdict that car did not have "a window defect that rendered it unfit for the ordinary purpose of providing transportation" should have ended the jury's task on the plaintiff's claim for breach of implied warranty.  But due to an error in the jury verdict form, the jury went on to award plaintiff damages.  Held, the trial court correctly granted… Read More

To qualify as a notice of entry of judgment under Code of Civil Procedure section 664.5, the clerk’s mailed notice must affirmatively state that it was given ‘upon order by the court’ or ‘under section 664.5,’ and a certificate of mailing the notice must be executed and placed in the file.” (Van Beurden Ins. Services, Inc. v. Customized Worldwide Weather… Read More

California has specific personal jurisdiction over Avon in a suit brought by a Calfiornia resident who used Avon's talc products and claims they were defective, containing asbestos which gave her mesothelioma.  Plaintiff adequately alleged facts showing that Avon had purposefully availed itself of California's benefits and that those contacts were related to her suit by showing that she had purchased… Read More

Defendant LLC was one of several companies run by Garrick.  It was a shell without assets or its own employees.  Other Garrick companies deposited funds in defendant's accounts when they wanted to pay its creditors including its defense attorneys.  This decision holds that the trial court did not err in adding Garrick and his other companies to the stipulated judgment… Read More

The Federal Aviation Administration Authorization Act of 1994 preempts state laws "related to a price, route, or service of any motor carrier . . . , broker, or freight forwarder with respect to the transportation of property."  (49 U.S.C. § 14501(c).)  In this case, an injured motorist brought a common law negligence action against a transportation broker for negligently selecting… Read More

This decision holds that a bank or other non-savings and loan that acquired a loan originated by a savings and loan before the Dodd-Frank Act, is entitled to assert the same Home Owners Loan Act field preemption of state law as the originating savings institution could have.  To hold otherwise would impair an essential feature of how savings institutions worked… Read More

This decision affirms a summary judgment in favor of defendant police officers and their employer, the city, against plaintiff's complaint based on injuries she suffered while escaping from a car used by bank robbers, holding plaintiff and other hostages, to escape from the scene of the robbery.  Police must use act reasonably in all the circumstances in employing deadly force. … Read More

A lawsuit against a public entity may allege additional facts and new causes of action not stated in the plaintiff's government claim so long as they are based on the same fundamental facts supporting liability on the same legal theory or theories raised in the tort claim.  Here, the plaintiff's government claim alleged torts arising from the police response to… Read More

No matter what its title, an order assigning a case (or here, a habeas corpus petition) to a particular judge is an all purpose assignment that requires a party to file a 170.6 motion within ten days of the assignment or of the party's appearance, whichever is later if (a) the order instantly pinpoints the judge whom the parties can… Read More

This decision holds that Trustees v. Greenough (1882) 105 U.S. 527, and Central Railroad & Banking Co. v. Pettus (1885) 113 U.S. 116 prohibit routine awards of incentive payments to named plaintiffs from a common fund class recovery.  Greenough upheld an award of attorneys’ fees and litigation expenses but rejected as without legal basis an award for the lead plaintiff's… Read More

A 998 offer made jointly to a defendant surgeon and his putative employer was invalid because it required both to agree to the offer.  Consent of a single defendant would be insufficient to accept the offer as presented.  The case illustrates why 998 offers are invalid when made to multiple defendants requiring all to consent.  The putative employer had defenses… Read More

Though the defendant did not appear and defaulted, it did not thereby waive any objection to personal jurisdiction.  A trial court may and should determine its own subject matter and personal jurisdiction before entering a default judgment to assure that it is not a void decree.  Here, the trial court properly gave plaintiff notice of its doubt that it had… Read More

This decision dismisses an appeal as untimely.  The appealed orders were issued before the COVID-19 court closures.  The trial court's emergency rules treated dates during the closure as holidays, so under CCP 12a, the notice of appeal was due the next day which was not a holiday, namely, June 1, when the trial court reopened.  The Court of Appeal's emergency… Read More

When the complaint does not allege facts disclosing the amount in controversy, a defendant removing the case under CAFA need only allege facts that plausibly show that the case satisfies CAFA's jurisdictional requirements, including the amount in controversy.  The notice of removal need not cite evidence supporting the allegations of those jurisdictional facts.  The plaintiff can challenge the notice of… Read More