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.

Trial court properly concluded that decedent’s action in quit-claiming a one-third interest in a parcel of real property to defendant prior to her death could be construed consistently with her will, which disposed of all property owned by her probate estate at the time of her death.  Read More

An initial motion for relief from default due to attorney fault is not considered a motion for reconsideration, so it need not show new law or facts which are ordinarily needed to support a motion for reconsideration.  Read More

If all existing named parties consent to magistrate judge jurisdiction, the magistrate judge may rule on a motion to intervene even if the prospective intervenor does not consent.  Read More

In a suit by a California resident against a Texas company that refurbished cellphones, the state of California lacked personal jurisdiction over the defendant because, although the Texas company was owned by a California corporation with overlapping executive personnel, there was insufficient evidence that the Texas company was the California parent's agent or that it purposefully directed its injurious activities… Read More

Plaintiff states lacked parens patriae standing to challenge California’s law about conditions under which hens may be kept if their eggs are to be sold in California, since the law’s financial burden falls on individual egg producers, not the plaintiff states’ citizens in general.  Read More

A general denial to an interpleader complaint is insufficient to raise any issue for trial as to defendant's claimed interest in the interpleaded funds; rather, a factually pleaded cross-complaint is required instead.  Read More

Prisoner may use peremptory challenge on judge who initially reviews a habeas corpus petition to decide whether to issue order to show cause.  Read More

In lawsuit by a subcontractor’s worker who was injured on the job, summary judgment was properly entered in favor of defendant general contractor, because a general is not responsible for injuries to a sub’s workers unless the general either contributed to the injury or breached a non-delegable duty it owed to the worker, and neither of those exceptions applied here.  Read More

In employee’s lawsuit against union alleging breach of duty of fair representation, district court erroneously granted summary judgment in favor of union, when the evidence showed that the union failed to pursue Rollins' special rights under a seniority agreement and the evidence conflicted as to whether its stated reasons for doing so were actually reasonable.  Read More

The Department of Industrial Relations may penalize any employer who lacks worker’s compensation coverage for more than one week during the calendar year preceding the determination, and Labor Code 3722(b)’s reference to “calendar year” is interpreted to mean the 12 months immediately preceding the determination of lack of insurance rather than a Jan. 1 to Dec. 31 calendar year.  Read More

Communications between the Agricultural Labor Relations Board and its general counsel are subject to the attorney-client privilege insofar as the communications pertain to the decision whether the Board should file a complaint seeking injunctive relief in court.  Read More

Counsel for the plaintiff class in one wage-and-hour suit against Apple is too conflicted to act as counsel for the plaintiff class in a separate wage-and-hour case against the same company, since members of the first class would likely be defense witnesses in the second class.  Read More

An expert who prepared a report for a competitor of plaintiff concerning the percentage of construction and demolition trash that plaintiff recycled proved its report was speech protected under the Anti-SLAPP statute, since the recycling rate of waste disposal companies is a subject of intense state and local regulation and there did not need to be a present, on-going controversy… Read More

Trial court should have granted defendant attorney’s anti-SLAPP motion after he was sued for supposedly aiding and abetting the wrongful acts of his client (a landlord) by defending him in a lawsuit brought by the plaintiff (a tenant).  Read More

In a suit seeking to overturn a state regulatory body’s cease-and-desist order that was preventing purchase of water rights, plaintiff water district was not entitled to a fee award under the Private Attorney General Act because its own financial interest in completing the purchase contract—broadly construed—far exceeded the amount it spent on attorney fees.  Read More

Common law policy of separating an administrative agency's prosecutorial staff from its lawyers advising the agency applies only to quasi-judicial proceedings before the administrative agency itself, and not to regular court actions.  Read More

In case involving knee injury that resulted from implantation of medical device, the jury’s award of $5 million in noneconomic damages was excessive and was the result of prejudice caused by misconduct of plaintiff’s counsel in belittling and mocking defendant's witnesses and counsel as well as the trial court itself.  Read More

1 166 167 168 169 170 185