California Appellate Tracker

A prosecutor may freeze and seize a criminal defendant's assets to pay restitution or a restitution fine ordered as part of a criminal sentence for certain white-collar crimes, but the resulting property interest is only defensible against a later transferee of the property if the county finishes the procedure and perfects its lien. Read More

An abstract of judgment filed after the judgment debtor's death does not create a lien on estate property, nor is a criminal restitution judgment creditor entitled to priority of payment from the judgment debtor’s estate. Read More

Elder abuse case was properly remanded—and attorney fees properly awarded against defendant removing party—by the district court after defendant's fraudulent joinder theory was appropriately rejected. Read More

An employee of a gas station operated by an independent franchisee could not bring wage and hour action against the franchisor because the franchisor was not his employer under the relevant statutory test. Read More

A taxpayer who is not a party to a government contract nevertheless has the standing to seek invalidation of the contract on the ground the public officer letting the contract had a personal interest in it. Read More

The usual lodestar approach to an attorney fee award (under which the hourly rate is set by the market rate for attorney services) applies to proceedings involving teacher discharge before the Commission on Professional Competence. Read More

Clear error, alone, is insufficient grounds for the Ninth Circuit to issue a writ of mandate; substantial prejudice must also be shown. Read More

An innocent recipient is liable to the victim if, at the time he receives stolen money from a thief, he has reason to suspect the money was stolen. Read More

An arbitration award was vacated as having been obtained by undue means when the arbitrators relied on a brief not served on the opposing party. Read More

Foreign corporations may not be sued as defendants under the Alien Tort Claims Act, 28 USC 1350. Read More

Inter partes review of challenges to a patent before the Patent Office does not violate Article III because a patent grant falls within the public rights doctrine.   Read More

Once inter partes review is commenced by the Patent Office, the proceeding must decide the patentability of all of the claims the petitioner has challenged. Read More

Naruto, the monkey, cannot sue for copyright infringement; the Copyright Act does not grant animals standing. Read More

Creditors of a bankrupt debtor could not be held in contempt of the discharge injunction and sanctioned for filing post-petition motions in a state court action for an award of attorney fees against the debtor, since they had a good faith (albeit incorrect and unreasonable) belief that the injunction did not apply. Read More

The parol evidence rule does not bar admission of oral promises contradicting a writing if offered to prove fraud—even if the party offering the parol evidence does not seek to rescind or otherwise overturn the written agreement. Read More

An indemnification plan offered in connection with a self-storage lease is not insurance so the lessor/indemnitor needs no insurance license. Read More

Judgment in earlier wage & hour class action that employees filed against their staffing company employer barred later suit on the same claims by same employees against the firm where they worked since that firm was the staffing company’s agent with respect to payroll matters. Read More

A derivative action against Google’s executives was properly dismissed as the plaintiff shareholders were on inquiry notice of their claim outside the limitations period. Read More

A trial court did not abuse its discretion in dismissing wage & hour putative class action for failure to bring to trial within five years since pending arbitration did not prevent plaintiff from moving forward with the non-arbitrable pieces of litigation. Read More

Defendant was sufficiently engaged in collection efforts to qualify as a debt collection agency and hence did not run afoul of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act’s prohibition on creating the false belief in a consumer that a person other than the creditor is participating in the collection of the debt. Read More