Civil Procedure

A statement of compliance with a demand for production of documents does not need to identify which documents relate to specific items of the demand.  Instead, a general statement that the party will produce the requested documents suffices.  (CCP 2031.210.)  However, under CCP 2031.280(a), as recently amended, when the documents are produced, the producing party must  identify to which specific… Read More

The trial court erred in denying defendant's motion for relief from default based on CCP 473(b)'s attorney error provision.  The motion for relief was filed within six months after entry of judgment and was accompanied by an attorney declaration of fault.  It was in proper form, or at least substantially complied with the form requirements.  A motion for relief must… Read More

A 2022 amendment to CCP 340.16(b)(3) revives until 2026 claims for damage resulting from sexual assault that occurred after 2008.  This decision holds that the amendment revives any claim for damages arising from a sexual assault, without regard to the legal theory of the claim, and is not limited to tort claims for sexual assault or battery.  However, it questions… Read More

Except when a statute granting the right to an attorney fee award itself provides a basis for federal question jurisdiction, a district court lacks jurisdiction to award the defendant attorney fees after dismissing the complaint for lack of Article III standing. Read More

While a district court may convert a motion to dismiss into a summary judgment motion in the parties submit evidence in support of the motion, FRCP 12(d), the district court cannot sua sponte convert a summary judgment motion into a motion to dismiss.  Here, defendant didn't move to dismiss for lack of lack of Article III standing but raised the… Read More

Although acknowledging the issue still remains open, it decides the review the trial court's rulings on evidentiary objections on a summary judgment motion under the abuse of discretion standard which it claims is the majority position both before and after Reid v. Google, Inc. (2010) 50 Cal.4th 512 (which highlighted but did not decide the issue). Read More

The parties stipulated to appointing a retired judge as a temporary judge to hear portions of their marital dissolution proceedings.  The order appointing the temporary judge stated that the appointment would end on April 1, 2020 except as to any requests for orders that had been submitted before that date but had not yet been resolved.  Here, wife submitted a… Read More

The trial court did not abuse its discretion in awarding HSBC its full expert witness fees incurred after rejection of its 998 offer.  The expert's testimony was used at trial.  His travel and meal expenses were also properly awarded as he came from Georgia to testify.  The trial court also did not abuse its discretion in declining to reduce the… Read More

On plaintiff's first appeal, the Court of Appeal reversed a summary judgment for defendant.  On remand, the case was tried to a judge who ruled in defendant's favor and plaintiff again appealed.  Plaintiff claimed that HSBC violated Penal Code 632 and 632.7 by intentionally recording her confidential personal calls to and from her daughter who, at the time, was working… Read More

Plaintiff sued Disney for common law misappropriation of his story idea in making its animated file Zootopia.  This decision affirms a summary judgment for Disney.  Plaintiff had no direct evidence of copying.  It did not produce evidence sufficient to allow a reasonable inference of copying either.  The allegedly copied elements of plaintiff's story idea were not so unique as to… Read More

The trial court erred in granting the defendant gun shop summary adjudication of plaintiff gun shot victim's negligence per se claim based on sale of the gun to an 18-year-old who did not possess a valid, unexpired hunting license.  See Pen. Code 27510.)  Though "valid, unexpired" was ambiguous as to whether it included a valid license before its effective date,… Read More

This decision affirms a $7 million judgment, including $6 million in punitive damages, against an employer for firing plaintiff in violation of Lab. Code 1102.5(c) (which prohibits adverse employment action in retaliation for a refusal to work reasonably perceived to violate a local, state or federal rule or regulation) and 232.5 (which prohibits retaliation for reporting working coinditions).  Plaintiff was… Read More

Plaintiff filed a 1983 action against a police officer claiming that he had violated his federal civil rights by killing a man who was a father figure to him.  On the defendant's motion, the district court dismissed the action finding that the plaintiff lacked Article III standing because plaintiff did not allege any not allege amy custodial, biological, or legal… Read More

Fire insurance policies must be written on the statutory form that includes a one-year from inception of loss (semi-contractual) statute of limitations.  This decision holds that the insured cannot circumvent that limitations provision by bringing suit under the UCL for an injunction against denial of insurance coverage under similar circumstances.  To have standing to sue under the UCL, the plaintiff… Read More

Disagreeing with Muller v. Fresno Community Hospital & Medical Center (2009) 172 Cal.App.4th 887, this decision holds that the California Supreme Court has not abandoned its requirement that for an order to be appealable under the collateral order doctrine, the order must direct payment of money or performance of an act.  That requirement remains a restriction on collateral order appeals… Read More

Herbal sued defendant for Lanham Act violations, an intentional tort.  Accordingly, the court applied the Calder effects test to determine whether Arizona could assert personal jurisdiction over the defendant.  Defendants purposefully directed their tortious activities toward Arizona by selling to Arizona residents on an interactive website.  The alleged harm arose from those sales, among others.  And Herbal's pre-suit cease-and-desist letters… Read More

Applying Ixchel Pharma, LLC v. Biogen, Inc. (2020) 9 Cal. 5th 1130 to an at-will employment contract, this decision holds that to assert a tort claim for inducing breach of the contract, the plaintiff must allege independently wrongful conduct.  Here, plaintiff could not do so.  He lacked antitrust standing to rely on the antitrust violation that he had alleged as… Read More

To have standing to sue for an antitrust violation, the plaintiff must allege an injury arising from the aspect of the alleged antitrust violation that causes the evil at which the antitrust laws are aimed; namely, a reduction in competition.  Here, the alleged violation was a pre-merger agreement between the merging entities not to compete for each other's customers before… Read More

The owner and subscriber of a phone with a number listed on the Do-Not-Call Registry has suffered an injury in fact sufficient to confer Article III standing when unsolicited telemarketing calls or texts are sent to the number in alleged violation of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act even if the communications are intended for or solicited by another individual, and… Read More

Under CCP 414.10, anyone who is over 18 years old may serve a summons and complaint--except for a party.  Here, plaintiff's service of the summons and complaint on the defendant was insufficient to give the court jurisdiction over the defendant.  Hence, the ensuing default judgment agains the defendant was properly set aside under CCP 473(d) as void on its face. … Read More