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.

Water districts obtained a permit from the Department of Health Services to add chloramine to drinking water in an effort to kill germs, so they were protected from a nuisance lawsuit which sought to challenge this practice. Read More

A trial court should have given mortgage plaintiff further leave to amend a complaint to allege that party who foreclosed lacked any legal interest in the deed of trust, due to errors in the property’s chain of title. Read More

A two-thirds majority of workers may approve an alternative workweek schedule (AWS) of fewer days but longer hours without overtime pay, but in a subsequent court challenge, the burden is on the employer to show that proper procedures (such as a secret ballot) were followed when the AWS was approved. Read More

An insured plaintiff who received treatment from out-of-network doctors that were not covered by his health insurance should be allowed to introduce the full bills into evidence, similarly to the way a wholly uninsured plaintiff may introduce such bills. Read More

A trial court has inherent power to dismiss as frivolous plaintiff’s 31 proceedings against prominent persons whom he claimed were harassing him. Read More

Holidays and weekends count against the running of the three-day notice to quit period in unlawful detainer unless the landlord states that the required rent payment may only be remitted by mail. Read More

The Legislature directed the Inspector General to investigate the treatment of prisoners at the High Desert prison, so the IG’s office should have won its Anti-SLAPP motion when it got sued for interrogating police officers, allegedly in violation of the Police Officers’ Bill of Rights Act.  Read More

Head of Contractors’ State License Board (a state agency) should not have been compelled to appear for a deposition, since deposing party could not show that he had direct personal factual information pertaining to material issues that could not be obtained from any other source. Read More

Testimony during a Rule 30(b)(6) deposition does not absolutely bind the corporation in the sense of a judicial admission, but rather is evidence that—like other deposition testimony—can be corrected, explained, supplemented or contradicted. Read More

A second class action is entitled to American Pipe tolling of the statute of limitations during the pendency of a first class action on the same claim if the first action is dismissed for lack of an adequate class representative and a new named plaintiff is promptly added. Read More

1 137 138 139 140 141 190