California Appellate Tracker

Herbal sued defendant for Lanham Act violations, an intentional tort.  Accordingly, the court applied the Calder effects test to determine whether Arizona could assert personal jurisdiction over the defendant.  Defendants purposefully directed their tortious activities toward Arizona by selling to Arizona residents on an interactive website.  The alleged harm arose from those sales, among others.  And Herbal's pre-suit cease-and-desist letters… Read More

Applying Ixchel Pharma, LLC v. Biogen, Inc. (2020) 9 Cal. 5th 1130 to an at-will employment contract, this decision holds that to assert a tort claim for inducing breach of the contract, the plaintiff must allege independently wrongful conduct.  Here, plaintiff could not do so.  He lacked antitrust standing to rely on the antitrust violation that he had alleged as… Read More

Expanding on Asahi Kasei Pharma Corp. v. CoTherix, Inc. (2012) 204 Cal.App.4th 1, this decision holds that the Cartwright Act does not prohibit anti-competitive acts taken by merger partners in the run-up to the merger, even if the merger, though commenced in good faith, in the end falls through. Read More

To have standing to sue for an antitrust violation, the plaintiff must allege an injury arising from the aspect of the alleged antitrust violation that causes the evil at which the antitrust laws are aimed; namely, a reduction in competition.  Here, the alleged violation was a pre-merger agreement between the merging entities not to compete for each other's customers before… Read More

Oregon's wiretapping statute violates the First Amendment and is unenforceable.  It is a content-based regulation of speech since it excepts from its scope police recordings of conversations in which the policeman is a party and is performing official duties.  The law doesn't meet strict scrutiny because it is too broad, banning audio or visual recording on any conversation without consent--thus,… Read More

The owner and subscriber of a phone with a number listed on the Do-Not-Call Registry has suffered an injury in fact sufficient to confer Article III standing when unsolicited telemarketing calls or texts are sent to the number in alleged violation of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act even if the communications are intended for or solicited by another individual, and… Read More

Under CCP 414.10, anyone who is over 18 years old may serve a summons and complaint--except for a party.  Here, plaintiff's service of the summons and complaint on the defendant was insufficient to give the court jurisdiction over the defendant.  Hence, the ensuing default judgment agains the defendant was properly set aside under CCP 473(d) as void on its face. … Read More

Following Weidenfeller v. Star & Garter (1991) 1 Cal.App.4th 1, this decision holds that when a plaintiff's injury results in part from one defendant's negligence and another defendant's intentional act, the court must on either defendant's request, submit a jury instruction and special verdict directing apportionment of liability as between the defendants under Civ. Code 1431.2. Read More

The primary assumption of the risk doctrine does not apply to students who engage in sports activities as a mandatory part of their physical education classes. Read More

This decision affirms an order amending a judgment to name an individual as an alter ego of the corporate defendant.  There was evidence to support the trial court's finding that inequity would otherwise result.  The judgment creditors had been unable to satisfy their judgments/  The individual had been CEO and owner of the corporation until judgment was entered against it. … Read More

If the judgment that is being enforced is an amended judgment, the 10-year time limit on its enforceability runs from entry of the amended judgment, not the original judgment. Read More

The Court of Appeals may raise sua sponte a question as to whether CAFA jurisdiction exists in a removed action even though neither the plaintiff nor the district court challenged the defendant's removal of the action or questioned the existence of CAFA jurisdiction.  Here, neither the removal notice nor an attached declaration established that CAFA's $5 million amount in controversy… Read More

(The Alien Tort Statute (28 USC 1350) allows a private action by an alien against a defendant for aiding and abetting a crime against the law of nations in a foreign country.  For this purpose, the actus reus of aiding and abetting is providing assistance, encouragement, or moral support that has a substantial effect on the crimes.  Assistance may take… Read More

The trial court abused its discretion in holding that environmental protection parties were not entitled to attorney fees against a homeowner's association under CCP 1021.5 under the Adoption of Joshua S. (2008) 42 Cal.4th 945 exception.  That exception is narrow; it applies only to parties that litigate purely private matters that happen to raise issues of public importance.  It does… Read More

The trial court did not abuse its discretion in holding that a plaintiff homeowners association was not entitled to private attorney general fees under the catalyst theory.  To prevail on that theory, the court must find that the plaintiff's lawsuit was a material factor that contributed in a significant way to the defendant's adopting a changed plan or conduct that… Read More

Following Tsasu LLC v. U.S. Bank Trust, N.A. (2021) 62 Cal.App.5th 704, this decision applies CCP 764.060 according to its clear terms, holding that the lien of Ridec an encumbrancer for value and without actual or constructive knowledge could not be expunged in favor of a defendant named in a prior in rem quiet title suit but never properly served. … Read More

The interim adverse judgment rule bars malicious prosecution actions by establishing probable cause for bringing the action.  However, that rule applies only to judgments or rulings on formal dispositive motions, not oral remarks from the bench during the course of trial which are not rulings on any matter then pending for decision.  Furthermore, the fraud or perjury exception to the… Read More

An order allowing a plaintiff to withdraw from arbitration under CCP 1281.98(b) because the defendant has not timely paid arbitration fees is appealable because it overrides the earlier court order compelling arbitration and operates effectively as a denial of the motion to compel. Read More

Defendant employer did not pay its arbitration fees within 30 days after their due date.  Under CCP 1287.98, plaintiff therefore had and exercised the right to withdraw his claim from arbitration and pursue it in court.  The arbitrator or arbitration administrator had no power to avoid the effect of defendant's nonpayment by extending the due date after defendant's default.  Also,… Read More

This decision holds that the trial court erred in granting defendant summary judgment against plaintiff's claim to quiet title to a railroad easement across plaintiff's property benefiting defendant's parcel.  Plaintiff claimed the railroad had abandoned the easement.  Abandonment depends on cessation of use of the easement for permitted purposes and the easement owner's intent not to use the easement in… Read More