Through defendant talent agency, plaintiff hired several performers for a rock concert to be held in April 2020. Under the contract, plaintiff made a $6 million deposit that was non-refundable. However, the contract had a force majeure clause which defined force majeure broadly enough to include cancellation of the concert due to COVID restrictions. However, the clause further provided that… Read More
The Song-Beverly Warranty Act requires new car manufacturers to provide restitution of the purchase price to the buyer of a defective car. (Civ. Code 1793.2(d)(2)(B).) This decision holds that if the buyer trades in or sells the defective car. the trade in credit or resale price is not deducted from the restitution that the manufacturer must pay, at least when… Read More
The trial court did not abuse its discretion in holding that plaintiff could not have validly entered into a contract with an arbitration clause when the contract was 21 pages, the review period was 38 seconds and through a cell phone, and plaintiff was 81 years old with virtually no technological ability. Furthermore, plaintiff's income was limited; she was careful… Read More
An action to rescind a contract for fraud is an action on the contract for purposes of Civil Code 1717. Section 1717 is not limited to actions for breach of contract or seeking to enforce the contract. A party is entitled to attorney fees under section 1717 even when the party prevails on grounds the contract is inapplicable, invalid, unenforceable… Read More
Choice of law clauses in maritime contracts are presumptively enforceable as a matter of federal admiralty law just as forum selection clauses in those contracts are generally enforceable. Choice of law clauses in maritime contracts are unenforceable only when they contravene a federal statute or conflict with established federal maritime policy or when the parties cannot furnish a reasonable basis… Read More
46 U.S.C. § 30527(a) provides that a owner "of a vessel transporting passengers between ports in the United States" cannot contract for a release of liability for negligently caused injiury or death due to the owner's or its employees' negligence. This decision holds that the statute does not apply to forbid enforcement of a release obtained by the owner of… Read More
Following Mejia v. DACM, Inc. (2020) 54 Cal.App.5th 691 and Maldonado v. Fast Auto Loans (2021) 60 Cal.App.5th 710 and rejecting Hodges v. Comcast Cable Communications, LLC (9th Cir. 2021) 21 F.4th 535, this decision holds that a suit alleging UCL and CLRA claims and seeking an injunction against allegedly false advertising which would benefit both existing and future customers… Read More
The trial court correctly denied enforcement of the employer's arbitration agreement. The arbitration agreement was procedurally unconscionable both because it was an adhesion contract in the employment context and because the way it was presented to the prospective employee for electronic signature made it difficult for her to read before signing. The agreement was substantively unconscionable in containing a confidentiality… Read More
The trial court correctly denied defendant's motion to compel arbitration despite the agreement's delegation clause because plaintiff, a minor, disaffirmed all agreements with defendant pursuant to Family Code 6710. The disaffirmance voided not only the underlying agreement and its arbitration clause but also its delegation provision. Plaintiff's disaffirmance of any agreement with defendant was sufficient to disaffirm the delegation clause… Read More
Civil Code 1566, 1567, and 1570 establish a right to rescission in cases in which a person’s consent to a transaction was obtained by “menace”: threats of confinement, of unlawful violence to the person or his or her property, or of injury to a person’s character. This is effectively the civil version of extortion. So, Tran could state a claim… Read More
This decision affirms a trial court's denial of defendant elder care facility's motion to compel arbitration. The arbitration agreement was procedurally unconscionable because the arbitration clause was buried in a lengthy document about other matters, not presented as a separate agreement or marked in any manner to draw attention to it. Also, the plaintiff was under extreme time pressure to… Read More
Health Net's arbitration clause did not satisfy H&S Code 1363.1's requirements. The enrollment form did not clearly that the plan required arbitration of disputes because it said that the arbitration clause didn't apply if the plan was governed by ERISA--and the enrolling employee would have no way to determine whether ERISA applied. Also, because of intervening text about ERISA plans,… Read More
Reversing a summary judgment for defendant in this breach of contract suit, the Court of Appeal found the parties' brief signed napkin agreement to be enforceable despite some ambiguities and terms left for later determination. It was not too indefinite to enforce or too indefinite to indicate agreement on essential terms. Parol evidence was properly admitted to construe the ambiguous… Read More
The trial court correctly denied Mattson's motion to compel arbitration of Applied's suit against it for violation of the Uniform Trade Secrets Act. Mattson had hired Lai away from Applied. Lai's employment agreement with Applied contained an arbitration clause. Mattson was not a party to that contract and could not enforce it on a equitable estoppel basis since Applied's claim… Read More
In a nice mirror image of Chelios v. Kaye (1990) 219 Cal.App.3d 75, 80, this decision holds that since a contract is merged into the judgment on a breach of contract claim, a provision of the contract limiting attorney fee awards to $1,000 does not limit the fees that may be awarded to the prevailing plaintiff under CCP 685.040 as… Read More
This decision affirms a prejudgment attachment order. The trial court did not abuse its discretion in finding that the parties had not amended a fully integrated written contract which provided that all amendments had to be signed and in writing. Under the Uniform Electronic Transactions Act (CC 1633.1 et seq.), it is not enough to show that a document was… Read More
Following Department of Fair Employment & Housing v. Cisco Systems, Inc. (2022) 82 Cal.App.5th 93 and EEOC v. Waffle House Inc. (2002) 122 S.Ct. 754, this decision holds that the People of the State of California (as represented by the Attorney General and two District Attorneys) and the Division of Labor Standards Enforcement cannot be required to arbitrate claims that… Read More
COVID-19 closure orders did not excuse Fitness' nonperformance of its lease obligations. The closure orders allowed commercial construction and so did not justify its stopping renovation of the leased premises as required by the lease. The force majeure clause of the lease didn't excuse either stopping construction or failing to pay rent as neither of those "acts" were prevented by… Read More
A forum selection clause in defendant corporation's Delaware by-laws selecting the Delaware Chancery Court as the forum for any shareholder disputes was unenforceable in California state court because there is no right to a jury trial in Delaware Chancery Court so the forum selection clause operated as a pre-suit waiver of the constitutional right to a jury trial which cannot… Read More
Agreeing with Montemayor v. Ford Motor Co. (2023) 92 Cal.App.5th 958 and other recent cases refusing to follow Felisilda v. FCA US LLC (2020) 53 Cal.App.5th 486, this decision holds that a standard California car sale contract with an arbitration clause does not require the car buyer to arbitrate his warranty claims or Song Beverly Act claims against the car's… Read More
