Jurisdiction

Plaintiff and defendant were a married couple living in Georgia.  While on a visit to California, husband assaulted and battered wife.  The requirements for California to exercise specific jurisdiction over a nonresident defendant are satisfied when the defendant travels to California and commits a tort while in California--if the suit arises from that tort. California has an interest in deterring… Read More

Straumann, a Swiss company, and its Swiss-resident officer, Hemm, established purposeful contacts with California by entering into an agreement to be the exclusive distributor outside the United States for Rodo, a California company making dental products.  Hemm was a member of Rodo's board at the time, but negotiated the exclusive distributorship as Straumann's agent.  Rodo's shareholders sued claiming that Rodo's… Read More

After the Court of Appeal decided in Hollingsworth v. Superior Court (2019) 37 Cal.App.5th 927 that the trial court, having first acquired jurisdiction, should decide whether the Workers Compensation Appeals Board had exclusive jurisdiction over this worker's injury suit--a question that turned on whether the employer had workers compensation insurance coverage at the time plaintiff was injured.  The plaintiff had… Read More

Each class member must establish Article III standing in order to recover relief in a case in federal court.  Here, TransUnion included incorrect OFAC terrorist information in its credit files on 8,000 class members but issued credit reports to third parties with the incorrect OFAC information only as to 1,600 of the class members.  This decision holds that only the… Read More

A shareholder in a California-based corporation has Article III standing to sue the California Secretary of State to seek to enjoin SB 826 (2018) which enacted Corp. Code  301.3, 2115.5, requiring covered corporations to have at least one female director by 2019 and up to three female directors by 2021.  Even though the statute is directed against corporations, not their… Read More

The trial court retains jurisdiction to consider and approve a final report by a receiver appointed to remediate a nuisance caused by a substandard building is appointed under both H&S Code 17980.7 even after the plaintiff governmental entity dismisses the action.  The receiver's final report and motion for its approval must be served on all persons with an interest in… Read More

Two individuals and a number of states lack standing to challenge the minimum essential coverage provision of Obamacare because Congress eliminated the penalty for non-compliance with the statutory requirement of minimum coverage.  As there was no longer any governmental compulsion to obtain the coverage, the individual plaintiffs could not show that their supposed injury from having paid for coverage was… Read More

Federal courts lack Article III jurisdiction over portions of a PAGA suit that attack alleged wage and hour regulations which did not injure the named plaintiff.  A PAGA suit does not fall within the qui tam action exception to the ordinary Article III requirement that the plaintiff has sustained injury from the wrong he sues to redress.  Unlike a traditional… Read More

Plaintiff is a medical doctor specializing in pain management.  CVS, a pharmacy, informed him it would no longer fill his patients' prescriptions, citing conerns he was over-prescribing controlled substances.  Plaintiff sued for an injunction directing CVS to fill his prescriptions.  Held, injunction properly denied.  The State Board of Pharmacy has primary jurisdiction over the issues in this litigation.  It enforces… Read More

When an appellate court’s reversal is accompanied by directions requiring specific proceedings on remand, those directions are binding on the trial court and must be followed.  Here, the disposition language of the prior appellate decision directed a new trial of damages, which the trial court properly held.  The opinion also contained advice on how the trial court should frame special… Read More

Following  Langere v. Verizon Wireless Services, LLC (9th Cir. 2020) 983 F.3d 1115 and Microsoft Corp. v. Baker (2017) 137 S.Ct. 1702, this decision holds that the Court of Appeal lacks appellate jurisdiction over an appeal from a voluntary dismissal entered for the purpose of trying to appeal from an order compelling arbitration in a putative class action.  It does… Read More

To establish organizational standing, the plaintiff associations  needed to show that the challenged conduct frustrated their organizational missions and that they diverted resources to combat that conduct.  Diversion of resources happens when the plaintiffs alter their resource allocation to combat the challenged practices, but not when they go about their business as usual.  Here, the evidence on defendant's Rule 12(b)(1)… Read More

In a proceeding under 9 USC 7 to enforce a subpoena that an arbitrator has issued to a non-party witness, when no federal claim is at stake, a federal court has jurisdiction over the matter only if the requirements for diversity jurisdiction (including the amount in controversy requirement) are satisfied.  The amount in controversy exceeds $75,000, if the value of… Read More

Following Zehia v. Superior Court (2020) 45 Cal..App.5th 543 and distinguishing Burdick v. Superior Court (2015) 233 Cal.App.4th 8, this decision holds that California may exercise specific jurisdiction over the Canadian resident defendant.  He published defamatory internet postings about plaintiff, a California resident, on an internet site run by another California resident as well as on plaintiff's internet site.  The… Read More

After a voluntary dismissal, the trial court lacks jurisdiction to adjudicate the merits of the plaintiff's claims but may still rule on ancillary matters not involving the merits, such as in this case, a motion to reconsider discovery sanctions that were issued based on the plaintiff's misleading statement of his lawyer's hourly rate without revealing that the lawyer had agreed… Read More

For specific jurisdiction is sufficient if the plaintiff's claim "arises from or is related to" the defendant's contacts with the forum state.  Arises from describes a causal relationship between the defendants contacts and the claim.  But relates to does not require causation.  Here, Ford had substantial contacts with Montana and Minnesota, selling cars of the same type as those involved… Read More

A request for nominal damages satisfies the redressability element of standing where a plaintiff’s claim is based on a completed violation of a legal right.  For the purpose of Article III standing, nominal damages provide the necessary redress for a past, completed violation of a legal right. Read More

Adams, a lawyer, switched his party affiliation from Democrat to Independent, and then filed this case challenging the constitutionality of Delaware's constitutional provisions that allow only a bare majority of judges on its top five courts to be of the same political party and require that the remaining judges on the top three courts be of the other major political… Read More

Plaintiff sued the manufacturer of Pop Secret popcorn, claiming it committed unfair business practices and breached the warranty of merchantability, by including partially hydrogenated oils (artificial trans fat) in the popcorn after the FDA had concluded that the ingredient was no longer approved for human consumption.  This decision holds that plaintiff failed to allege a sufficient injury in fact to… Read More

The federal Nutrition Education Act pre-empts Proposition 65’s requirement of a label on cereal warning of naturally occurring acrylamide in cooked whole grains. Read More