California Appellate Tracker

The California Insurance Commissioner did not exceed his powers in promulgating regulations governing an insurer’s communicating an estimate of replacement costs to an insured.  Read More

A garnishment proceeding against a third party not involved in the original state court proceeding is a separate action which the garnishee can remove to federal court, and after removal, the action is governed by the federal rules of procedure, not state garnishment procedure.  Read More

Prospective employer violated the Fair Credit Reporting Act by including a release of claims in the same document as the statutorily required notice that it might obtain a credit report on the applicant for employment purposes.  Read More

General legislation covers Indian tribes unless they are expressly excluded, so the Dodd-Frank Act is interpreted to regulate for-profit consumer lending enterprises of Indian tribes.  Read More

Since California law treats silence as non-acceptance of a contract offer, a consumer did not agree to arbitrate disputes with Samsung by failing to respond to an arbitration clause that was included in a warranty and product information booklet packaged with a Galaxy cellphone which the customer received after signing a Verizon subscription agreement.  Read More

So long as the notice of intention to move for a new trial is timely filed, the trial court may, in its discretion, consider late-filed affidavits supporting the motion. Read More

Disclosure of defendant company’s president's misdeeds did not render the company’s previous touting of its ethics code an actionable misrepresentation or omission under Rule 10b-5, since ethics codes are inherently aspirational, not an actual depiction of corporate practice.  Read More

After an Indiana-based bus manufacturer was dismissed from the case, California law governed Chinese bus passengers’ claims against a California-based bus distributor for injuries sustained when the bus overturned in Arizona; only California had a governmental interest in application of its law.  Read More

Defendant’s Anti-SLAPP motion was properly denied when he was sued for secretly tape recording, and later publishing, a conversation that took place over dinner at a restaurant with plaintiff’s president, because even though this was protected activity, plaintiff showed a probability of success on its claims for, among other things, invasion of privacy.  Read More

For purposes of the five-year deadline for bringing a civil case to trial, trial “commences” when a jury is impaneled and sworn—even if the voir dire is not concluded within the five-year period.  Read More

The sue-and-be-sued provision in Fannie Mae's statutory charter does not confer federal jurisdiction over suits against Fannie Mae or allow it to remove those suits to federal court absent some other basis for federal jurisdiction.  Read More

Probate court did not err in charging the interests of two trust beneficiaries for the fees incurred by the trustee in defending against their unwarranted charges which were brought in bad faith and supported by false testimony, but the court did err by imposing personal liability on the beneficiaries for sums exceeding the amount of their interest in the trust.  Read More

Based on a recently-enacted Oregon statute requiring courts to enter a limited, immediately appealable judgment when denying an Anti-SLAPP motion, the Ninth Circuit now has jurisdiction to consider appeals from orders denying Anti-SLAPP motions under Oregon law.  Read More

A California state court judgment must be given issue preclusive effect on any issue it decides even if it is affirmed by the state Court of Appeal only on other issues.   Read More

The Court of Appeals lacked jurisdiction over a non-final order denying motion to compel arbitration because the motion was brought under California’s Arbitration Act, not the Federal Arbitration Act.  Read More

District court properly denied equitable relief to plaintiff whose attorney filed a claim challenging a forfeiture one day late, since this error was the result of ordinary negligence rather than an extraordinary circumstance that would warrant relief.  Read More

An attorney engaged in debt collection and violated the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act by sending a homeowner a letter demanding payment of delinquent homeowners association dues and threatening to file a lien on the homeowner’s property unless the dues were paid within 25 days, thus overshadowing the FDCPA-required notice that the homeowner had 30 days to demand validation of… Read More

Triable issues of fact existed as to whether defendant employer had terminated plaintiff’s employment in retaliation for exercising her rights under California’s Family and Medical Leave Act.  Read More

Plaintiffs who purchased applications from Apple's App Store are direct purchasers from Apple and can sue it for monopolizing the market for distribution of applications that run on the iPhone.  Read More

Because no statute, regulation or contract provision required defendant to use a progress charting tool known as an earned value management system, defendant did not violate the False Claims Act, as plaintiff alleged, by an implied false certification that it used that tool.  Read More