A homeowners association’s post-foreclosure quiet title action stated a viable claim against the former owner who might challenge the foreclosure; hence, the former owner was not fraudulently joined and the federal courts lacked diversity jurisdiction. Read More
A 998 offer is invalid and will not shift costs if it requires a release of claims beyond those pertaining to the action in which the 998 offer is made, such as, here, where the 998 offer required plaintiff to release all claims he might have against the defendant, whether or not they were connected with the incident giving rise… Read More
Plaintiff injured in an auto accident by defendant driving an ambulance was subject to the two-year limitations period for personal injury claims arising from general negligence—as opposed to the one-year period that applies to medical malpractice claims—since the act of driving the ambulance does not involve the practice of medicine. Read More
Plaintiff’s one-year limitations period for bringing suit after the California Department of Fair Employment & Housing issued a right-to-sue letter should be equitably tolled for a year beyond the EEOC’s issuance of its own right-to-sue letter, because plaintiff reasonably relied on the DFEH letter’s incorrect statement that the limitations period would be tolled while EEOC investigated the claim. Read More
In this wage and hour dispute, defendant was not entitled to a writ of mandate to overturn a district court scheduling order setting trial on the issue of whether plaintiff’s contracts were employment agreements in interstate commerce and thus exempt from the Federal Arbitration Act, since defendant has an adequate remedy on appeal from any order denying its motion to… Read More
Delayed discovery cannot be used to circumvent a limitations period triggered by events giving prospective plaintiffs constructive knowledge of their claim, such as, here, the 180-day limitations period for suing to challenge a public entity’s failure to comply with the California Environmental Quality Act. Read More
Plaintiff’s unsuccessful federal 1983 suit against the Franchise Tax Board for publishing plaintiff’s name as one of the top 500 tax debtors barred later state law suit against the FTB for that same act. Read More
In determining whether an action or tactic is frivolous for purposes of a sanctions award under CCP 128.5, the court should apply an objective standard, judging the merits of the action or tactic from a reasonable person's perspective; and that a complaint withstood demurrer does not prove it was not frivolous, since whether a claim is meritless must be evaluated… Read More
Defendant’s concurrent filing of an Anti-SLAPP motion with his motion to quash service of summons for lack of personal jurisdiction does not constitute a general appearance waiving the jurisdictional argument. Read More
A governmental entity that defended its employee under a proper reservation of rights need not indemnify the employee for punitive damages awarded against him. Read More
A prisoner serving a life sentence with possibility of parole is entitled to a two-year tolling of the statute of limitations on his medical malpractice claims arising out of treatment in a prison hospital. Read More
An order granting an Anti-SLAPP motion as to two of three defendants is not appealable under federal procedural law which governs a diversity case pending in federal court—even though such an order would be appealable under California law Read More
Order vacating consent judgment based on defendants’ substantial compliance is reversed because the record was insufficient to establish defendants’ compliance with all of terms of the judgment entered in favor of plaintiff, a prisoner who followed the Wiccan religion. Read More
Service of summons and complaint on defendant was considered adequate when his father accepted substituted service at home, defendant could not establish that he had a permanent residence elsewhere, and his father gave him actual notice of the suit within three days of the substituted service. Read More
In an insurance bad faith action, Brandt legal fees that the insured incurs in his successful effort to obtain insurance benefits are actual damages which must be included with other actual damages in computing the actual to punitive ratio, even if the parties stipulate to having the trial judge set Brandt fees after the jury has awarded both other actual… Read More
District court judge did not err by reconvening jury for further deliberations to correct an error in the verdicts, since he did so within minutes of discharging them and questioned them to make sure they had not been influenced by outside sources. Read More
Once it concludes that it lacks jurisdiction, a district court may not rule on the merits of an action; and if it does so anyway, the resulting judgment is not effective for purposes of res judicata. Read More
A trial judge has discretion to dispose of a case or claim on the merits in the course of ruling on a motion in limine, but must do so using the normal nonsuit standard of review. Read More
A child molester’s “grooming” presents to the molested minor did not trigger application of Insurance Code section 11583 which tolls the statute of limitations on partial payment of compensation for injury given without notice of applicable limitations periods. Read More
Under CCP 1032(a), a prevailing party is entitled to a cost award even if it is united in interest with co-parties that did not prevail, but the trial court has discretion in awarding only those jointly incurred costs which were reasonably necessary to the prevailing party’s case. Read More
