Civil Procedure

American Pipe tolling during the pendency of an initial class action does not toll the statute of limitations for a follow-on class action, but only for individual suits by members of the putative class in the initial class action. Read More

Demurrer sustained on grounds of misjoinder was reversed and remanded after one of two misjoined plaintiffs settled out while the case was on appeal, thereby resolving the misjoinder. Read More

A premature post-trial motion (in this case, a Rule 59 motion to alter or amend the judgment) neither shortens nor extends the time for appeal. Read More

By moving to have the judge decide an equitable claim, plaintiff waived error in an allegedly premature mistrial based on a hung jury. Read More

Mail service on a Chinese defendant was ineffective, even though it had agreed to such service because China has opted out of the Hague Convention’s article allowing service by mail. Read More

This California case is at the intersection of interpleader and foreclosure litigation. A foreclosure trustee interpleaded surplus funds following a foreclosure sale that was challenged by the borrower in a wrongful foreclosure action.  It shouldn’t have.  An interpleader lies only where the holder of third-party funds may face multiple liabilities, but Civil Code section 2924k sets forth exactly how surplus… Read More

Interpleader cross-complaint filed by the trustee of a deed of trust was correctly dismissed because there was no question that surplus proceeds from a foreclosure sale belonged to the trustor, notwithstanding the trustor’s ongoing wrongful foreclosure lawsuit. Read More

A settlement agreement and judgment dismissing a prior class action wage & hour suit bars plaintiff's follow-on complaint for nonpayment of reporting time pay during the period covered by the prior litigation, since the agreement’s release was broad enough to cover this component of wages even though it didn’t actually come up in the previous suit. Read More

A person adversely affected by a bankruptcy court order has the standing to appeal from the order, even if he did not appear at the hearing or raise an objection before entry of the appealed order. Read More

Plaintiff’s shareholder derivative action against a corporation's executives and auditor in California was properly dismissed on forum non-conveniens grounds since corporation’s by-laws included a forum selection clause in favor of Delaware and auditor had consented to jurisdiction in Delaware. Read More

A court may not enter judgment by default in an amount that exceeds the amount demanded in the complaint, and the fact that defendant is given actual notice of the damages plaintiff seeks by some means other than the complaint (such as, here, during a settlement conference) is irrelevant.  Read More

City of San Diego’s ordinance setting a 30-day limitations period on challenges to tax assessments does not deny plaintiffs due process and is not subject to equitable tolling based on a prior suit by a different taxpayer. Read More

An employee who has been affected by one Labor Code violation by the employer may bring a Private Attorney General Act suit against the employer for civil penalties based on all Labor Code violations committed by the employer.  Read More

In collections suit, collection agency plaintiff was held to Delaware’s three-year statute of limitations—which was the jurisdiction selected in the credit card account agreement’s choice of law clause—as opposed to the four-year limitations period in California, where the suit was brought. Read More

An appraiser hired to provide an appraisal for the lender's use does not owe the borrower a duty of care. Read More

A trial court has inherent power to dismiss as frivolous plaintiff’s 31 proceedings against prominent persons whom he claimed were harassing him. Read More

Holidays and weekends count against the running of the three-day notice to quit period in unlawful detainer unless the landlord states that the required rent payment may only be remitted by mail. Read More

Head of Contractors’ State License Board (a state agency) should not have been compelled to appear for a deposition, since deposing party could not show that he had direct personal factual information pertaining to material issues that could not be obtained from any other source. Read More

Warning labels required for most alcoholic beverages under Proposition 65 do not need to provide a detailed list of all the harmful chemicals found in the product. Read More

Testimony during a Rule 30(b)(6) deposition does not absolutely bind the corporation in the sense of a judicial admission, but rather is evidence that—like other deposition testimony—can be corrected, explained, supplemented or contradicted. Read More