Civil Procedure

Trial court did not abuse its discretion in granting plaintiff’s motion for discretionary relief from summary judgment after plaintiff’s attorney declared that he made fatal mistakes in opposition to summary judgment motion because of illness and side effects from medication.  Read More

For the first time, this decision holds that the rule barring attorneys from vouching for a witness’ credibility in closing argument applies to civil as well as criminal cases, but because the rule’s application to civil cases was not clear before, the district court did not commit plain error in failing to strike the forbidden argument sua sponte.  Read More

The district court had subject matter jurisdiction if complete diversity actually existed when the complaint was filed, even if the complaint failed to allege it properly, so the district court properly denied defendant’s motion to vacate a summary judgment for lack of subject matter jurisdiction after the plaintiff submitted evidence of complete diversity in opposition.  Read More

Defendant corporation was subject to specific (though not general) personal jurisdiction in California, since it was not necessary for the plaintiffs to be California residents or to have claims that arise directly out of defendants' California-related activities in order for their claims to “arise out of or be related to” the defendant’s forum-directed activities.  Read More

Failure to recite all the evidence on an issue waives a substantial evidence attack on appeal.  Read More

Los Angeles ordinance setting $15.75 minimum hourly wage is not pre-empted by the National Labor Relations Act.  Read More

Trial court erred in denying appellant’s motion for a settled statement of unrecorded oral proceedings, but appellant failed to properly preserve that issue for appeal, so judgment had to be affirmed for lack of an adequate record to review.  Read More

A public entity has four years to sue to invalidate its own contract under Gov. Code 1090 because of a board member approving the contract was on the contractor’s payroll, not the mere 60 days allowed a private party to sue to invalidate the public entity’s contracts.  Read More

When, on a summary judgment motion in a case removed from state court, a federal court determines it lacks subject matter jurisdiction because the plaintiff lacks Article III standing, the federal court should remand the case to state court, not dismiss it.  Read More

Ordinarily, when an appeal is mooted, the appellate court simply dismisses the appeal, but it can also vacate judgment and remand to allow the trial court to dismiss the case if legislative or administrative action has mooted the entire case; here, however, the appellant itself mooted its own appeal so it should not be allowed escape the consequences of a… Read More

The Financial Institutions Reform, Recovery, and Enforcement Act (“FIRREA”) provides an extension on the statutes of limitations for contract and tort claims in actions brought by the National Credit Union Administration Board, which supersedes other limitations periods set by state or federal statute.  Read More

Trial court erred in allowing suspended (and eventually dissolved) corporation relief from default judgment, since its agent for service of process was served, thus giving it actual knowledge of the suit.  Read More

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