California Appellate Tracker

Plaintiff, a public interest group that was not itself harmed, sued two immigration consultants who had posted statutory bonds issued by Hudson as required under the Immigration Consultant Act (Bus. & Prof. Code 22440 et seq.), seeking injunctive relief for violation of that act.  This decision holds that plaintiff cannot recover its attorney fees from the surety, Hudson, because the… Read More

Plaintiff sued Road Runner after finding it had charged him an annual fee for its loyalty program for three years after the initial free period.  Road Runner moved to compel arbitration under a clause it added to its website during the last year before plaintiff sued.  This decision holds that plaintiff did not agree to clause.  It was not presented… Read More

Following Sutter Health v. Superior Court (2014) 227 Cal.App.4th 1546, this decision holds that to state a claim under Civ. Code 556.36 and 56.101 for negligence in storing or disposing of medical information, the plaintiff must allege not just that the defendant negligently lost (or lost control of) confidential information about the plaintiff but also that the information was viewed… Read More

When a responding party serves both objections and answers to interrogatories, the 45-day deadline for filing a motion to compel (even if directed only against the objections) does not begin to run until the responding party serves a verification of the answers.  However, service of only a notice of motion to compel before the deadline is insufficient.  To be timely,… Read More

An administrative hearing need not be conducted according to the rules of procedure and evidence used in civil trials.  Instead, any relevant evidence may be considered if it is the sort of evidence on which responsible persons are accustomed to rely in the conduct of serious affairs. (Gov. Code, § 11513(c).)  So, here the department's hearing officer did not err… Read More

In a Workplace Violence Protective Order hearing, the trial court must allow the parties (and here, particularly the defendant) an opportunity to present any relevant evidence, including through cross-examination of the plaintiff's witness(es).  Here, the trial court disallowed cross-examination, thus violating the defendant's due process rights and requiring reversal of the anti-harassment injunction. Read More

Landlord's taking possession of premises and re-leasing it to a third party did not moot defendant's appeal from denial of its motion to set aside the default judgment in the landlord's unlawful detainer against it.  The appellate court could still grant relief in the form of restitution under CCP 908 either in kind (i.e., restoration of possession) or in money. Read More

Doubling down on LaSalle v. Vogel (2019) 36 Cal.App.5th 127, this decision holds that plaintiff's counsel owes an ethical and legal obligation to notify the defendant's counsel (if known) of the defendant's failure to timely respond to the complaint and plaintiff's intention to seek a default.  Here, plaintiff not only didn't notify defendant's counsel, but also arranged to serve the… Read More

A setoff under CCP 431.70 must be asserted as an affirmative defense in the answer to a complaint.  A party may not assert a setoff under that section in a post-judgment motion.  A judgment debtor may not use a non-statutory post-judgment motion as a means of obtaining an offset against the judgment based on disputed claims. Read More

This decision affirms an order enforcing a settlement agreement that resolved 20 medical malpractice actions--even though the agreement for liquidated damages of $50,000 per month up to a cap of $1.5 million if the defendant failed to timely pay the installments due under the $575,000 settlement amount.  The opinion emphasizes that under Civ. Code 1781(b), which applies to contracts other… Read More

Reversing an Anti-SLAPP order striking plaintiff's complaint, this decision holds that Civ. Code 1788.17 incorprates into the Rosenthal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, the strict liability standard of 15 USC 1692(e) for false statements made in collecting a debt or regarding the legal status of the debt.  Thus, the debt collector may be held liable under the Rosenthal Act for… Read More

Vehicle Code 14608 prohibits a car rental agency from renting a car unless the renter presents a facially valid California driver's license or a facially valid driver's license from the non-California jurisdiction in which the renter resides.  The statute also requires the rental agency to check either the signatures on the license and the rental agreement or the picture on… Read More

The owner of the Bonaventure Hotel in Los Angeles could not state a claim for inverse condemnation or nuisance against defendant for the disruption caused by defendant's digging a trench down Fourth Street to build a subway tunnel.  In prior litigation, the court had determined that due to unstable soil conditions, an underground tunneling operation was infeasible.  An inverse condemnation… Read More

Plaintiff came to defendant's emergency room and was given an MRI without first checking to see if he had metal implants.  He did and was burned as a result of the procedure.  This decision affirms JNOV on plaintiff's elder abuse claim.  Plaintiff could not show a case of "neglect" since defendant did not have care or custody of plaintiff.  The… Read More

The two defendants purchased municipal bonds for a third party, Riccardi.  The defendants bought the bonds in their own names, but with Riccardi's money and immediately transferred the bonds to him.  They shared profits on Riccardi's resale of the bonds.  By this means, Riccardi was able to buy more of popular municipal bonds than he otherwise would have been able… Read More

The communicable disease extension of the comprehensive property insurance policy that Fireman's issued to Amy's provided coverage for the costs of remediating, cleaning, disinfecting, etc. the premises after a communicable disease event, defined to mean  “an event in which a public health authority has ordered that a location be evacuated, decontaminated, or disinfected due to the outbreak of a communicable… Read More

A state law requiring a gun owner to report a missing gun within 5 days did not preempt a local ordinance requiring the report to be made within 48 hours.  The ordinance does not duplicate state law since it requires earlier reporting.  Also, the ordinance doesn't contradict state law which sets an outside deadline on reporting but does not bar… Read More

Under Lab. Code 1138, as under 29 USC 106, a union cannot be held liable for conduct on a picket line except on "clear proof" of the union's "actual participation in, or actual authorization of those acts."  On an Anti-SLAPP motion to strike, the court must take that higher burden of proof into consideration in weighing, on the second step… Read More

Following Sonner v. Premier Nutrition Corp. (9th Cir. 2020) 971 F.3d 834, this decision holds that even in a diverity case, a federal court may exercise equitable jurisdiction only if the plaintiff has no adequate legal remedy.  Here, plaintiff's remedies under the UCL were all equitable, and the federal court lacked equitable jurisdiction over them because the CLRA offered the… Read More

Distinguishing Hernandez v. KWPH Enterprises (2004) 116 Cal.App.4th 170, this decision holds that the ambulance EMTs transporting plaintiff from one psychiatric hospital to another owed her a duty of care to prevent her from harming herself.  Hernandez involved a patient who voluntarily asked to be transported to a hospital but then freaked out after she arrived there.  In this case,… Read More