California Appellate Tracker

Torts, Government Entity Defendant, Duty, Protect Foster Child From Abuse, 1, 1 There is a special relationship between a foster child and the public social services agency that places the child with foster parents.  Consideration of the Rowland v. Christian factors does not lead to the conclusion that the agency should not owe the child a duty of care to… Read More

Employment, Wage & Hour, Public Works, Prevailing Wage, Indemnity Rights Of Misled Subcontractor, 1, 1 Under Lab. Code 1781, a contractor is entitled to indemnity from a public agency that awards a contract but does not inform the contractor that the work will be a public works project to which the prevailing wage law applies.  This decision holds that a… Read More

The trial court erred in compelling arbitration as the arbitration agreement was unconscionable.  Plaintiff was in foreclosure when he sought an attorney to represent him.  A nonlawyer presented plaintiff with the contract written only in English, which plaintiff can't read.  No translation was given to plaintiff.  Also, he had to agree in a short time and without access to the… Read More

Attorney fees on appeal must be sought in the trial court within 40 days after issuance of the remittitur.  This decision holds that the 40-day deadline runs from the date the remittitur is entered in the Court of Appeal's records.  There is no extension of the 40 day deadline for service by electronic means or by mail because the remittitur… Read More

Under 9 USC 402(a), a pre-dispute arbitration agreement is not enforceable with respect to a case that relates to sexual assault or harassment. The parties cannot contract their way around this federal statute by a choice of law clause choosing California law either as to the contract's substance or as the law governing the arbitration provision in particular. Read More

Insurance, Particular Exclusions, Automobile Use, Compensated Carrying Exclusion, 1, 2 Plaintiff's auto insurance policy had a compensated carrying exclusion which denied coverage when the car was being used to transport property for compensation.  The exclusion barred collision coverage for an accident that plaintiff was involved in while carrying cannabis for his employer to its customers.  Cannabis is property.  Murphy was… Read More

Following Ramirez v. Charter Communications, Inc. (2024) 16 Cal.5th 478, this decision holds that the trial court erred in denying an employer's motion to compel arbitration.  Though the arbitration clause was procedurally unconscionable as it was part of a pre-employment adhesion contract, it was not substantively unconscionable.  The clause did not improperly limit discovery.  It incorporated JAMS arbitration rules which… Read More

Arbitration, Compelling, Plaintiff Must Initiate Arbitration After Order Compelling It, 1, 2 After the trial court granted defendant employer's motion to compel arbitration, neither party took any step to initiate the arbitration.  Eventually, the trial court entered an order vacating its prior stay of litigation pending arbitration, holding that it was the employer/defendant's burden to commence the arbitration since it… Read More

Probate, No Contest Clause, Petition to Interpret or Reform a Will or Trust Is Not A Contest, 1, 2 A petition seeking to interpret or reform a will or deed of trust to fulfill the testator's or trustor's intent is not a "contest" within the meaning of a no-contest clause or within the meaning of Probate Code 16061.7 which sets… Read More

Arbitration, Defenses To, Unconscionability, Severance Of Unconscionable Provisions, 1, 5 In Ramirez v. Charter Communications, Inc. (2024) 16 Cal.5th 478, the Supreme Court held that three portions of Charter's arbitration agreement were substantively unconscionable:  the non-mutual exemption of many employer claims, but few employee claims from arbitration, a shortened statute of limitations and an attorney fee clause that conflicted with… Read More

On the same day IQ received a letter from plaintiff stating that all future communications regarding his debt should be sent only to his attorney, IQ sent plaintiff (not his attorney) a debt validation letter.  Doing so violated the FDCPA (15 U.S.C. § 1692c(a)(2)).  This decision holds that the plaintiff has Article III standing to sue even without a showing… Read More

 The class action settlement in this case had all three of the danger-warnings of a plaintiff's lawyer's sell-out for increased fees:  a disproportionately large attorney fee provision, a clear-sailing provision, and reverter of unawarded attorney fees to the defendant.  Nevertheless, the trial court did not abuse its discretion in approving the settlement as fair, just, and reasonable.  The district court… Read More

Following its prior decision in the related FTC proceeding (FTC v. Qualcomm Inc. (9th Cir. 2020) 969 F.3d 974, this decision holds that private plaintiffs did not allege a viable tie-in claim under California's Cartwright Act based on Qualcomm's "no license, no chips" policy of not selling its modem chips to manufacturers who did not also license Qualcomm's patents.  The… Read More

When a defendant moves to enforce a forum selection clause in a case in which the plaintiff asserts non-waivable statutory rights under California law, the defendant bears the burden of showing that the selected forum will apply California law or, if not, that it will afford the plaintiff as good if not better rights under the law that it will… Read More

 An employee cannot state a claim for disability discrimination under FEHA based on denial of disability retirement benefits.  Those benefits are not compensation or terms, conditions, or privileges of employment as to which FEHA forbids disability discrimination.  Instead, disability retirement benefits are a substitute for employment that has ceased.  Also, to be a "qualified" person whom FEHA protects against disability… Read More

 Without deciding whether it is possible for an employee to bring only a representative and not an individual PAGA claim, this decision holds that plaintiff's complaint sought to do just that and so escaped the reach of the employer's arbitration clause (See Adolph v. Uber Technologies, Inc. (2023) 14 Cal.5th 1104; Balderas v. Fresh Start Harvesting, Inc. (2024) 101 Cal.App.5th… Read More

This decision dismisses an appeal from a voluntary dismissal with prejudice of plaintiffs' claims following a trial court order sustaining a demurrer to some, but not all, alleged claims, with leave to amend.  It holds that the dismissal is not appealable and neither is the demurrer ruling which did not finally dispose of any alleged claims.  Combining the two non-appealable… Read More

Attorneys’ Fees, Prevailing Party, Obtaining Preliminary Injunction Is Insufficient, 5, 2 Under 42 USC 1988 (which allows attorney fee awards to prevailing parties in some civil rights actions), a plaintiff is a "prevailing party" only when a court conclusively resolves a claim by granting enduring judicial relief on the merits that materially alters the legal relationship between the parties.  The… Read More

Trademarks, Damages, Defendant's Profits, Affiliates Not Included Absent Veil Piercing, 5, 2 The Lanham Act allows a plaintiff to recover the defendant's profits from infringement of plaintiff's trademark.  15 U. S. C. §1117(a). This decision holds that absent proof of the elements of veil piercing, the statute requires that the damage award respect the principle of separate corporate existence.  Thus,… Read More

Courts, Consolidation, Tort Claims in Multidistrict Litigation, 2, 3 Uber did not show that the JPML had abused its discretion in consolidating for pretrial purposes many tort suits against Uber for not taking adequate measures to protect customers from drivers' sexual assaults and harassment.  Common questions need not predominate for consolidation, unlike class certification.  Centralizing the cases would promote judicial… Read More