California Appellate Tracker

Agreeing with Thomas v. Duggins Construction Co., Inc. (2006) 139 Cal.App.4th 1105, the Supreme Court holds that an intentional tortfeasor is not entitled to the benefits of Proposition 51 and CIvil Code 1431.2.  An intentional tortfeasor is fully liable for all of the plaintiff's economic and noneconomic damages.  Whereas, under secction 1431.2, a negligent tortfeasor is liable for the amount… Read More

An order denying a reconsideration motion under FRCivP 59(e) brought a year after an order denying summary judgment was not appealable.  The time to appeal the denial of summary judgment had long since expired.  A delayed motion for reconsideration under FRCivP 59(e) cannot be used to resurrect the case for appeal.  The denial of a Rule 59(e) motion is appealable… Read More

The United States chose not to intervene in Thrower's False Claims Act suit, but later filed a motion to dismiss the case.  The district court denied the motion to dismiss because it found the US had failed to meet its burden of demonstrating a valid governmental purpose related to the dismissal and because it failed to fully investigate the allegations… Read More

Landlord filed an unlawful detainer action against tenant, alleging that tenant owed $27,100 in rent.  Before trial landlord settled with tenant.  The settlement provided for a date and time by which tennat would be gone from the rented premises, and provided for entry of a judgment for $28,970 if tenant was not gone by the deadline.  Tenant missed the deadline… Read More

Prob. Code 21620 and 21622 deal differently with pretermitted heirs born after and those born before the testator's death.  Section 21620 establishes a presumption that the heirs born after the testator's death were omitted unintentionally and thus are entitled to inherit, unless an opposing party proves otherwise.  Under 21622, however, the burden is on the heirs born before the testator's… Read More

After having class certification denied and losing a partial summary judgment motion, plaintiff entered into a stipulation with defendant for a voluntary dismissal so he could appeal.  However, the stipulation reserved his right to appeal only the summary judgment and class certification rulings, not an earlier dismissal of a claim on a motion to dismiss.  This decision holds that by… Read More

The district court did not abuse its discretion in holding the plaintiff to the local rule requiring a class certification motion to be filed within 90 days of filing the complaint, particularly, as it then gave the plaintiff another 30 days to develop evidence and the right to file a supplemental brief.  Plaintiff couldn't show he was kept from discovery… Read More

A bankrupt may assume an existing lease of personal property (such as a car) under 11 USC 365(p).  This decision holds that the debtor may assume the lease, and the creditor may enforce it after the debtor is discharged without also complying with the rrequirements for reaffirming a debt under 11 USC 524(c). Read More

B&P Code 16600 bans any agreement that restrains anyone from engaging in a lawful business or trade.  While the Court has interpreted the section as strictly forbidding any restraint in the employment context, a different rule--the rule of reason--applies to contracts restraining trade outside the employment context. Read More

To prevail on a claim for tortiously inducing breach of an at-will contract (outside the context of employment contracts), the plaintiff must plead and prove that the defendant engaged in independently wrongful conduct to induce breach of the contract.  An at-will contract is similar to a prospective economic advantage.  The plaintiff has no right to compel performance in the future. … Read More

In evaluating the sufficiency of the evidence in support of a finding, an appellate court must make an appropriate adjustment to its analysis when the clear and convincing standard of proof applied before the trial court. In general, the court must determine whether the record, viewed as a whole, contains substantial evidence from which a reasonable trier of fact could… Read More

Class Actions, CAFA, Relationship to Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act Jurisdictional Requirements, 2, 7 CAFA does not impliedly repeal the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act's limitations on federal court jurisdiction.  For a federal court to have jurisdiction of a class action claim under the MMWA, there must be at least 100 named plaintiffs.  15 USC 2310(d)(3).  An MMWA class action claim brought by fewer… Read More

Plaintiffs pled a viable claim for false advertising under the UCL by the defendant manufacturers of pet food labeled "prescription" pet food.  Under the reasonable consumer test, use of the word "prescription" was misleading in suggesting that the pet food contrained medicine or drugs.  The fact that defendants sold their products, at least initially, only through vets did not make… Read More

When Judd, an actress, refused Harvey Weinstein's sexual advances, he bad-mouthed her to the producers of Lord of the Rings, and as a result, she was not hired for that blockbuster film.  Judd stated a viable claim against Weinstein for sexual harassment in violation of Civ. Code 51.9.  The section applies when the parties have one of several relationships specified… Read More

In some respects, the trial court's specification of reasons for granting a new trial, subject to a remittitur, for excessive damages was adequate.  For example, the trial court found that the jury had awarded duplicative damages for two different causes of action.  However, the appellate court held the reason was not supported by the record which showed there was substantial… Read More

In another wrongful termination and defamation case, this decision follows Roby v. McKesson Corp. (2009) 47 Cal.4th 686, in holding that a one-to-one ratio of punitive damages to compensatory damages is the constitutional limit.  Though emotional distress counts as physical injury for purposes of weighing reprehensibility, still plaintiff's emotional distress was not as severe as Roby's.  Also, as in Roby,… Read More

Disagreeing with  JSJ Limited Partnership v. Mehrban (2012) 205 Cal.App.4th 1512, this decision holds that a dismissal of the underlying lawsuit on res judicata grounds may constitute a favorable termination of that lawsuit permitting a follow-on malicious prosecution action if the judgment in the yet earlier case which was given res judicata effect was resolved on the merits.  I.e., if… Read More

Plaintiff alleged that before he entered into a HELOC in 2005, the lender orally promised him that its maturity in ten years, the lender would refinance the loan or extend its term.  The lender didn't and foreclosed instead when the plaintiff didn't repay all amounts due at maturity of the loan.  Held:  (1) The statute of frauds barred plaintiff's breach… Read More

In computing the three-year time within which summons and complaint must be served, CCP 583.240(b) excludes any time in which the prosecution of the action or proceedings in the action was stayed and the stay affected service.  This case holds that if litigation between plaintiff and defendant 1 is stayed (as it was here while those parties engaged in a… Read More

When a manufacturer cannot repair a new car to cure a defect after a reasonable number of attempts to do so, it must either give the buyer a replacement car or pay the buyer restitution of the full purchase price plus collateral charges and incidental damages.  Civ. Code 1793.2(d).  Initial registration fees payable on purchase or lease of a new… Read More