Skip to Content (Press Enter)

Skip to Nav (Press Enter)

Remedies

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.

Compensation for expected but unearned future income to which the plaintiff has no legal entitlement is not recoverable as restitution under the UCL, regardless whether it is characterized as lost market share. Lost profits are damages, not restitution, and are unavailable in a private action under the UCL.  Here, the trial court properly dismissed plaintiff optometrist's UCL claim against a… Read More

In determining the constitutionally permissible ratio of actual to punitive damages, the court may take into account actual harm which cannot be compensated for by an award of actual damages.  Here, for example, the plaintiff suffered emotional distress when her employment was terminated and her employer told her she was fired for poor performance when the real reason was that… Read More

BPI was a subcontractor on a public works project.  The department found that BPI had not been paying its workers at the prevailing wage rate and issued a Civil Wage Penalty Assessment for the underpaid wages plus a statutory penalty.  BPI claimed the general contractor was at fault for misinforming it about the prevailing wage rate.  After BPI filed a… Read More

Disagreeing with Lafferty II and Spikener, this decision holds that "recovery" as used in the FTC Holder Rule includes only damages, not attorney fees, and so the consumer may recover unlimited attorney fees against the holder of his or her contract on claims against the dealer.  The decision also concludes that the FTC 2019 interpretation of the Holder Rule's second… Read More

Under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (42 USC 2000bb-1, 2000bb-2) allows a private right of action for "appropriate relief" against a "government," a term defined to include an official or other person acting under color of law of the United States.  This decision holds that the definition of "government" expands the term's normal meaning to include officials in their individual… Read More

Debtor abusively filed an earlier bankruptcy on behalf of a business entity, voiding a nonjudicial foreclosure sale of the entity's real property held the same day.  In debtor's later personal bankruptcy, creditor filed a claim, contending it was entitled to damages from the debtor on state law claims for abuse of process and tortious interference with business relations based on… Read More

A preliminary injunction properly issued to require Uber and Lyft to stop misclassifying their drivers as independent contractors.  Under the ABC test adopted in Dynamex Operations West, Inc. v. Superior Court (2018) 4 Cal.5th 903 and AB5 (Lab. Code 2775), one who provides labor or services for pay is presumed to be an employee unless the hiring entity proves all… Read More

When a government entity sues and seeks a preliminary injunction to halt violation of a statute, it need only show a reasonable probability of success on the merits, and then a rebuttable presumption arises that public harm from the violation outweighs harm to the defendant from the injunction. (IT Corp. v. County of Imperial (1983) 35 Cal.3d 63.)  To overcome… Read More

This decision upholds a Workplace Violence Prevention injunction issued against a perennial attendant at LA City Council meetings who threatened a city attorney who advised the Council at those meetings. The defendant made threats against the attorney.  He put swastikas and KKK symbols on public comment cards at the Council meetings, indicated he thought the attorney was Jewish, and repeatedly… Read More

The district court erred in entering a nationwide injunction against the Trump Administration's unlawful restrictions on federal grants to localities, requiring them to forego the grants or foreswear their "sanctuary" statutes or ordinances.  The only plaintiffs in this case were San Francisco and California.  They suffered injury only within California, and they could be restored to their rightful position by… Read More

The trial court erred in granting a temporary restraining order on an ex parte basis in this case.  The declaration supporting the request for the TRO did not present admissible evidence of any impending emergency that required relief on an ex parte basis, as opposed to a noticed motion.  The case challenged the Governor's emergency order regarding voting by mail… Read More

If a party seeks a contractual attorney fee award as an adjunct to a judgment, the court determines the fee award on motion after entry of judgment; but if the party instead seeks attorney fees as an item of damage in a suit on the contract, the claim is an ordinary contract claim on which there is a right to… Read More

Because an injunction may not issue to enforce penal laws, a taxpayer action cannot be brought to enjoin public expenditures that allegedly are illegal solely because they violate a penal statute.  Read More

Defendant’s challenge to a settlement agreement clause providing for liquidated damages if defendant defaulted on its payment obligations required a fact-dependent determination from the trial judge, so it could not be raised for the first time on appeal.  Read More

Estate of elderly plaintiff was entitled to a constructive trust when plaintiff’s son’s wife diverted to her own use funds that son and wife agreed to hold in a bank account for plaintiff’s benefit.  Read More

1 2 3