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.

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

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

Defendant was unable to challenge domestic violence protective order on the ground that he had not consented to have a court commissioner decide the issue, because he impliedly consented to have the commissioner decide the matter by participating in the hearing and couldn’t produce an oral record of the proceedings proving he had withheld consent at that time.  Read More

While Congress may elevate intangible injuries to allow standing to sue, it cannot, by granting a right to statutory damages, create Article III standing when the plaintiff has suffered no actual injury, as can be the case when the defendant violates a statute’s purely procedural requirements.  Read More

A suit for pre-natal injuries caused by exposure to toxic chemicals is governed by CCP 340.4 (providing for a 6-year from birth limitations period not tolled during minority) rather than CCP 340.8 (providing for a two-year from discovery limitations period for suits for injuries from toxic chemicals, subject to tolling for minority).  Read More

Service of process after amendment naming defendant in place of a fictitious defendant is properly quashed when the plaintiff knew facts giving rise to his claim against defendant when the original complaint was filed. Read More

A vexatious litigant pre-filing order under CCP 391.7 prevents appeals by plaintiffs, but not by defendants. Read More

Independent contractors hired by a governmental entity for purposes of letting public contracts are subject to the same anti-corruption prohibitions that apply to government officers and employees, who are forbidden from having any interest in public contracts that they let.  Read More

Fair report privilege bars defamation and trade libel claims based on a press release issued by plaintiffs’ attorneys accurately summarizing jury verdict and proceedings in a False Claims Act suit against the defamation plaintiff.  Read More

The trial court did not abuse its discretion in granting terminating sanctions after plaintiff’s attorney repeatedly disobeyed in limine orders by referring to excluded evidence in his opening statement and questioning of witnesses, prejudicing defendants because jury might think their repeated, proper objections were hiding the true facts from the jury.  Read More

1 56 57 58 59