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.

Bankruptcy trustee may recoup debtor’s mortgage payoff to lender, which was made less than 90 days before filing bankruptcy.  Read More

A pre-dispute arbitration clause cannot be enforced to require arbitration of a claim based on the Private Attorney General Act, since the claim is brought on behalf of the state which is not party to the arbitration agreement.  Read More

Trial court did not abuse its discretion in appointing a receiver to cause defendant’s hotel to remediate housing code violations after judgment was entered against defendant and defendant was given 18 months in which to cure the violations on his own.  Read More

The Sarbanes-Oxley Act's whistleblower protection section applies to protect employees who report potential securities law violations internally to their supervisors as well as employees who report violations to the SEC.  Read More

A company with a website for anonymous online postings about employment experiences has standing to assert the privacy and First Amendment rights of its posters, and to force disclosure of their identities, the plaintiff must first prove a prima facie claim against the poster.  Read More

Trial court did not err by giving jury instructions on comparative negligence in legal malpractice claim brought against plaintiff’s former lawyer for drafting a trust instrument for the plaintiff that did not retain the character of her separate property, since plaintiff had herself read and understood relevant portions of the trust before signing it.  Read More

District court did not abuse its discretion in allowing dismissal without prejudice of lawsuit when plaintiff died, after his widow filed a new lawsuit in state court rather than timely substituting in her husband’s place.  Read More

Juror was discharged and replaced too hastily without adequate investigation, after two fellow jurors complained that she did not participate in the first 90 minutes of deliberations.  Read More

Defendant's 170.6 challenge was timely, even though it was filed after the challenged judge had heard and granted a temporary order removing minor from defendant’s custody.  Read More

A case is not placed automatically in the superior court’s limited jurisdiction based on the sum in controversy; so in this case since no party acted to have the case referred to limited jurisdiction, it remained in the court’s unlimited jurisdiction, and the longer period for seeking fees in an unlimited jurisdiction case applied.  Read More

Writings in a public employee’s or officer’s private e-mail account must be produced pursuant to a California Public Records Act request if the writings concern the conduct of public business.  Read More

Summary judgment was properly granted against truck repairman plaintiff who had sued brake manufacturers and designers for asbestos exposure, since he introduced no evidence linking defendants to any products that he had used in repairing trucks.  Read More

One-year statute of limitations on legal malpractice claim started running when defendant law firm filed a motion to withdraw from representing plaintiff—not when the court later granted that motion.  Read More

A factoring agreement under which an agricultural products distributor sells its accounts receivable to a factor at a discount is not a breach of the distributor’s fiduciary duties to growers, so the factor is not liable for the distributor’s debts to growers.  Read More

Statements and conduct during a hospital’s peer review of a staff physician are protected under the Anti-SLAPP statute, and cannot be challenged by the physician unless he has successfully sought relief in court from the peer review’s conclusion.  Read More

Defendant hospital's report to Board of Registered Nursing regarding plaintiff, a registered nurse, and her allegedly improper monitoring of a patient to whom she had given narcotics, was absolutely privileged under Civ. Code 47(b) and therefore could not be the subject of a viable defamation claim.  Read More

1 158 159 160 161 162 185