Skip to Content (Press Enter)

Skip to Nav (Press Enter)

California Appellate Tracker

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.

To achieve the status of a bona fide purchaser of real property without notice of adverse claims, the purchaser must conduct research with due diligence to see if the title it is planning to acquire is good, and heed any warning signs its research reveals.  The purchaser may not ignore information that comes to it from outside the recorded chain… Read More

Plaintiff chose to read aloud various Bible passages which he thought were anti-homosexual during and near gay pride parades.  The paraders and their sympathizers heckled plaintiff and then some began assaulting him.  For his own safety, the police told him to move away from the parade and arrested him when he refused to do so.    Held, the police violated plaintiff's… Read More

Even if an employee signed an arbitration agreement with the employer, the employee can avoid arbitrating a PAGA claim by simply not bringing one on her own behalf.  The employee has standing to sue on PAGA claims on behalf of other employees so long as she was an employee and was subjected to at least one of the Labor Code… Read More

Defendant waived the right to compel arbitration of individual PAGA claims by plaintiff and class members.  Even if the defendant got a second chance to compel arbitration when the US Supreme Court decided Viking River Cruises, Inc. v. Moriana (2022) 596 U.S. 639 and 24 class members signed arbitration agreements with defendant in 2022, it waited nearly a year (and… Read More

The trial court erred in denying defendant's Anti-SLAPP motion against plaintiff's malicious prosecution claim based on criminal charges that the public prosecutor brought against plaintiff.  Though defendant initiated the criminal proceeding with a complaint to the police, the undisputed evidence showed that the police carried out an independent investigation which, though it began with interviews with defendant's employees, went a… Read More

Rule 10b-5 proscribes untrue statements of a material fact or omissions to state a material fact necessary in order to make the statements made, in the light of the circumstances under which they were made, not misleading.  This decision holds that "pure omissions" do not violate the regulation.  A pure omission occurs when a speaker says nothing, in circumstances that… Read More

FAA section 1 (9 USC 1) exempts contracts of employment of seamen, railroad employees and other workers in interstate or foreign commerce from the FAA's other provisions.  This decision holds that the exemption's focus is on the work performed by the employee, not the industry in which the employer is engaged.  Even if the employer is not in any transportation… Read More

Summary judgment on plaintiff's discrimination in employment claims was properly granted because he failed to exhaust his administrative remedies with the FEHA and EEOC.  His administrative complaint mentioned entirely different grounds (sex and whistleblower retaliation by his supervisor) than his court complaint (sexual harassment, race, immigration status and retaliation  by coworkers).  Employees satisfy the administrative exhaustion requirement if their court… Read More

Defendant fired plaintiff wrongfully in 2018 thereby disentitling plaintiff to stock options he would otherwise have held in 2020 when defendant went public with an IPO, guaranteeing a profit on exercise of the stock options.  This decision holds that plaintiff's breach of contract damages need not be measured as of the date of breach (2018) but may properly be measured… Read More

The forum defendant rule under 28 USC 1441(b)(2) is a procedural, not a substantive bar to removal jurisdiction and so must be raised by a remand motion brought within 30 days of the filing of the removal notice or it is waived.  Here, the remand motion was filed on the 31st day after the removal petition.  Nevertheless, it was timely… Read More

Following Brock v. Kaiser Foundation Hospitals (1992) 10 Cal.App.4th 1790 and not Preston v. Kaiser Foundation Hospitals (1981) 126 Cal.App.3d 402, this decision holds that once a trial court grants a motion to compel arbitration, it retains only vestigial jurisdiction which does not extend to making any substantive rulings on the parties' claims or defenses.  Hence, the trial court lacks… Read More

Following California DUI Lawyers Assn. v. California Department of Motor Vehicles (2022) 77 Cal.App.5th 517, this decision holds that an individual is entitled to a new hearing before a non-conflicted DMV hearing officer only when the record of the administrative proceedings before the original hearing officer shows that that officer in fact acted as an advocate/prosecutor rather than merely as… Read More

In this case, an ambulance EMT challenged the constitutionality of Prop. 11 (Lab. Code 880 et seq.) which made ambulance employees remain reachable by a communication device during meal breaks and made that rule retroactive.  Plaintiff sought a ruling from a second Court of Appeal after the Fourth District upheld the measure in Calleros v. Rural Metro of San Diego,… Read More

Plaintiff, a guest in defendant's hotel, fell and hurt herself when the handheld shower head came apart in her hand.  This decision affirms a summary judgment for defendant because (a) plaintiff failed to raise a triable issue of fact as to whether defendant had actually knew or had reason to suspect that the shower head was defective or dangerous and… Read More

To pass 5th Amendment restraints on public taking of private property, a condition that a government entity imposes on a permit for development of private property must have an “essential nexus” to the government’s land-use interest and  have “rough proportionality” to the development’s impact on the land-use interest.  This decision holds that those tests apply to any condition imposed on… Read More

FAA section 2's exception for contracts of employment for workers in interstate commerce does not apply to or exempt business entities or commercial contracts from the FAA even if they are engaged in interstate commerce.  Plaintiff was a sophisticated business.  So delegation of arbitrability questions to the arbitrator in accordance with the chosen AAA Rules was not unconscionable.  Accordingly, it… Read More

Plaintiff signed an arbitration agreement when she was initially employed by defendant on an at-will basis.  That period of employment ended.  Plaintiff was rehired four months after terminating her original employment.  On rehiring plaintiff, defendant did not require her to sign a new arbitration agreement or say anything about reviving the old one.  Held, the trial court's conclusion that there… Read More

Inspired by a homily delivered in church by the defendant, a deacon in plaintiff's church, plaintiff agreed to and did donate over $1 million to buy a car and home for an allegedly homeless family.  Later, plaintiff sued for fraud, claiming that defendant spent the donation on unauthorized items and had deed the car and home not to the homeless… Read More

Distinguishing Wilson & Wilson v. City Council of Redwood City (2011) 191 Cal.App.4th 1559, this decision holds that completion of a project to revamp a shooting range did not moot plaintiff's appeal from denial of its CEQA claim.  Though the project was done, the city could still impose mitigation measures on the project to avoid its negative environmental impacts. Read More

1 9 10 11 12 13 185