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.
In a case of first impression in California, this decision holds that a party to one of several cases that the Judicial Council has ordered to be coordinated is not entitled to mandatory intervention in other of the coordinated cases than the one in which it already is a party because the would-be intervenor cannot show that it is so… Read More
To intervene as of right in an action under CCP 387(d)(1)(B), the intervenor must show that its interest is not “adequately represented by one or more of the existing parties.” Ordinarily, that is not a high hurdle, but a compelling showing is required to demonstrate inadequate representation if the intervenor's interest is the same as one or more of the… Read More
Under FRCivP 24(a), a would-be intervenor must show that it has a significant protectable interest as to the property or transaction involved in the dispute which may be impaired by resolution of the case as well as that the motion to intervene was timely and the existing parties don't or can't protect the intervenor's interest. Here, the plaintiff sought a… Read More
An heir is not categorically precluded from intervening in a wrongful death suit brought by the personal representative of the decedent's estate. So long as the heir meets the criteria for intervention, including inadequate representation of his interest by the existing parties, she should be permitted to intervene to protect those interests. By intervening, the heir does not file a… Read More
In this PAGA suit, the original plaintiff died while the suit was pending. This decision holds that the trial court correctly denied a different employee's motion to intervene in the action in place of the deceased plaintiff because the would-be plaintiff was not an employee at the time the original plaintiff sent her complaint to the DLSE and therefore would… Read More
Another employee of the same defendant employer is not entitled to intervene as of right in a PAGA suit brought by a different employee of that employer in order to challenge the settlement to which the latter employee and the employer have agreed. To intervene as of right under FRCivP 24(a)(2), a party must show (among other things) that his… Read More
The district court abused its discretion in denying Volkswagen's motion to intervene in a FOIA action seeking production of documents concerning Volkswagen's dieselgate fraud. Volkswagen satisfied Fed. R. Civ. P. 24(a)'s three requirements for intervention as of right. It had a significant protectible interest in asserting that the sought documents were exempt from FOIA disclosure under Exemption 4. A ruling… Read More
The trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying the longshoremen's union permissive intervention in this multi-sided litigation over an environmental impact report for the China Terminal which handles 17% of the cargo at the Port of Los Angeles. In ruling on a motion for permissive intervention, a court considers four factors: 1. whether the intervener has followed proper… Read More
A citizen is allowed to intervene as of right in the government’s Clean Air Act suit only when that suit would bar the citizen from filing a private action. Read More
If all existing named parties consent to magistrate judge jurisdiction, the magistrate judge may rule on a motion to intervene even if the prospective intervenor does not consent. Read More
