California Appellate Tracker

To intervene as of right in an action under CCP 387(d)(1)(B), the intervenor must show that its interest is not “adequately represented by one or more of the existing parties.”  Ordinarily, that is not a high hurdle, but a compelling showing is required to demonstrate inadequate representation if the intervenor's interest is the same as one or more of the… Read More

Continuing its campaign to rein in the use of "jurisdiction" to describe limitations on court powers, the Supreme Court holds in this case that 11 U.S.C. 363(m) does not deprive the federal courts of jurisdiction but merely sets out a rule merely cloaking certain good-faith purchasers or lessees with a targeted protection of their newly acquired property interest, applicable even… Read More

A party that challenges the constitutionality of FTC or SEC administrative tribunals may sue in federal district court to enjoin administrative proceedings against them, rather than undergoing the administrative hearing and then challenging any adverse decision by appeal in the appropriate Court of Appeals.  The harm the plaintiffs claim is being subjected to the allegedly unconstitutional administrative proceeding, and that… Read More

The Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act preempted plaintiff's claim that defendant's label on "I Can't Believe It's Not Butter! Spray" misleadingly listed 0 calories and 0 grams of fat by using artificially small serving sizes.  The FDA sets serving sizes for labeling purposes by type of food product.  The Butter! Spray was a "spray" not "butter."  And the label… Read More

Husband's divorce attorney violated the federal Wiretapping Statute (18 USC 2511) when he filed transcripts of conversations between wife and her child which husband had surreptitiously taped on a recorder hidden in the child's backpack.  Husband couldn't vicariously consent on the child's behalf to recording the conversations since the child was not in husband's custody at the time of the… Read More

The trial court correctly denied the Anti-SLAPP motion brought by Kaufman who was named as the real party in interest in this petition for writ of administrative mandamus to challenge San Francisco's approval of Kaufman's building permit and mitigated negative declaration under CEQA to remodel a home in the city.  Though Kaufman's successful appeal to the city from its planning… Read More

Adjunct professors sued USF for failing to give them wage statements that showed hours worked and hourly wage.  After judgment was entered in Gola's favor, the Legislature enacted Lab. Code 515.7 which allows nonprofit universities to avoid certain wage statement requirements if the adjunct professors' wages meet certain criteria.  This decision holds that section 515.7 does not operate retroactively to… Read More

Under CCP 36(a), a person who is over 70 and who proves that he or she has a substantial interest in the case, and that his or her health is such that preference is needed to avoid prejudicing his or her interest in the litigation, is entitled to have trial of the case set within 120 days after the motion… Read More

Following Merck & Co., Inc. v. Reynolds (2010) 130 S.Ct. 1784, this decision holds that the statute of limitations does not begin to run on a securities claim under 28 USC 1658 until the plaintiff can plead each of its elements with sufficient detail and particularity to survive a motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim.  Defendants’ allegedly… Read More

CCP 998 applies when the parties settle after the time for accepting the 998 offer expires and the settlement amount is less than the amount of the 998 offer--at least when the eventual settlement fully resolves all claims in the case and provides for eventual dismissal of the action after any award of attorney fees and costs is entered by… Read More

This decision holds that the complaint alleged a viable claim under CCP 526a to enjoin Orange County's program for collection of DNA samples from persons accused of misdemeanors on the ground that as applied it violated the accused's rights to privacy, counsel and due process.  Though Orange County had the accused misdemeanants sign forms waiving those rights, the complaint alleged… Read More

A taxpayer has standing to sue under CCP 526a to challenge a government program on the ground it is unconstitutional either on its face or as applied, at least if the as-applied challenge is broadly based, not confined to an aberrant application to one individual or a small group.  The taxpayer may bring the suit without having to identify any… Read More

The probate exception to federal court jurisdiction applies only  to cases in which the federal courts would be called on to “(1) probate or annul a will, (2) administer a decedent’s estate, or (3) assume in rem jurisdiction over property that is in the custody of the probate court.”  Goncalves v. Rady Children’s Hosp. San Diego, 865 F.3d 1237, 1252… Read More

Plaintiff tripped over the rear wheel of a Bird electric scooter that the user had parked with its rear wheel protruding into a public sidewalk.  The City of Los Angeles was not liable for failing to enforce conditions of its license which allowed Bird to operate in the city since the city exercised discretion in determining whether to enforce the… Read More

This decision holds that a restaurant established that its business losses incurred due to government closure orders during the COVID-19 pandemic were within the basic coverage of its business interruption coverage but also fell within the virus exclusion and the exclusion for loss caused directly or indirectly by enforcement of an ordinance or law.  Hence, judgment for the insurer is… Read More

Vehicle Code 27001 prohibits honking a car horn except when reasonably necessary to warn of a safety hazard.  Plaintiff was ticketed for honking her horn in a show of support for demonstrators protesting outside a government official's office.  Over a strong dissent, this decision holds that section 27001 is a content-neutral restriction on speech (to the extent a car horn… Read More

Postal Instant Press, Inc. v. Kaswa Corp. (2008) 162 Cal.App.4th 1510 rejected outside third party reverse piercing of the corporate veil to make the corporation liable for one of the shareholder's personal debts out of concern for the corporation's other shareholders and creditors.  This case was distinguishable as it involved a suit by one member of an LLC against the… Read More

In a case involving mixed legal and equitable claims, it is usual to try the equitable claims first to the court.  The court's findings on those equitable claims are binding on the jury when it decides the legal claims even if the court's findings are not necessary to its judgment on the equitable claims. Read More

In what started out as an attorney's attempt to collect $3,500 in fees from a client, the attorney got tagged with a $334,400 fee award to the client after losing in the mandatory fee arbitration proceeding and then not demanding a new trial within the allotted time.  B&P Code 6203 and 6204 provide for one-sided fee awards in an effort… Read More

Disagreeing with Felisilda v. FCA US LLC (2020) 53 Cal.App.5th 486, this decision holds that a standard California car sale contract with an arbitration clause does not require the car buyer to arbitrate his warranty claims against the car's manufacturer.  A warranty claim is not based on the car sale contract, but instead is an obligation of the manufacturer that… Read More