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.

The State Housing Law allows a city to recover its attorney fees if it sues to have a receiver appointed to remedy code violations in a non-compliant building, but not if the city intervenes in a lender’s suit for appointment of a receiver. Read More

In this tort action arising from a vehicular collision, defendant was entitled to summary judgment based on the sudden emergency or imminent peril doctrine after he rear-ended the car in front of him, which had come to a sudden stop when a car further along in traffic slammed on its brakes. Read More

Under Delaware law, a plaintiff must satisfy a stricter test to excuse failure to demand action from a corporation’s board of directors before filing a shareholder derivative suit, if the suit challenges the board’s neglect rather than its affirmative decision. Read More

Minnesota's statute that automatically revokes an ex-spouse's revocable designation of the other ex-spouse as a death beneficiary of an insurance policy or pension plan does not violate the federal constitution's Contracts Clause since it implements the former spouse’s presumed intent, thus supporting rather than impairing the contract. Read More

American Pipe tolling during the pendency of an initial class action does not toll the statute of limitations for a follow-on class action, but only for individual suits by members of the putative class in the initial class action. Read More

Though Uber’s arbitration clause contained a delegation clause, its motion to compel arbitration was wholly groundless and thus properly denied since the plaintiff’s claim arose from his work as a Lyft driver, not as an Uber driver. Read More

An addendum to a standard form workers compensation release did not release the employee’s sexual orientation employment discrimination claims as it did not clearly reference claims outside the workers' compensation system. Read More

To state a claim under California’s consumer protection laws based on a non-disclosure, the plaintiff must show the defendant owed a duty of disclosure and the nondisclosure was material, affecting the product’s central function. Read More

A creditor may buy other creditors' claims in order to vote against a Chapter 11 plan, thereby defeating confirmation, unless the debtor is able to show that the creditor is thereby seeking to secure some untoward advantage over other creditors for some ulterior motive. Read More

1 129 130 131 132 133 185