Under IWC Wage Order no. 7, an employer must "provide" a seat to covered clerical employees, unless work requirements preclude work while seated. This decision holds that except for the most obvious cases (such as where the employer has a seat at work station) whether the employer has "provided" a seat raises a question of fact that precludes summary judgment… Read More
To obtain a right to attach order, the plaintiff must prove it is more likely than not that the plaintiff will obtain a judgment against the defendant on the claim on which it seeks an attachment, and that claim must be either a claim for money based on contract or a claim for elder abuse. (CCP 481.190, 483.010; Welf. &… Read More
The FAA applies to an arbitration agreement between defendant, a paratransit provider, and plaintiff, one of its drivers. Though plaintiff was not an employer "in" interstate commerce since he drove only local, in-state routes not necessarily connected to airports or other modes of interstate commerce, his employer provided paratransit services mandated by the ADA. Plaintiff was hired to and did… Read More
Reasoning that Kirkeby v. Superior Court (2004) 33 Cal.4th 642 impliedly overruled BGJ Associates v. Superior Court (1999) 75 Cal.App.4th 952, this decision holds that when a plaintiff seeks to impose a constructive trust on specific property so as to become (again) the owner of that property wrongfully taken from him, the action "affects title to real property" sufficiently so… Read More
Google sent emails to contributors to Google Maps stating that they could "unlock" benefits like a free terabyte of storage by making further contributions to Google Maps as Local Guides. This decision holds that the emails did not constitute enforceable unilateral offers of a terabyte of storage because the emails did not say how much content the offerees had to… Read More
Petrella v. Metro-Goldwin-Mayer, Inc. (2014) 134 S.Ct. 1962 did not abrogate the rule that the 3-year statute of limitations for copyright infringement in modified by the discovery to allow suit within 3 years of the date when the plaintiff first knew or reasonably should have known of the infringement. Read More
A judgment is not one "on the merits" entitled to claim or issue preclusive effect if the appeal from the judgment is dismissed solely on the ground that the appeal is moot due to post-judgment events--such as, in this case, completion of the development project that allegedly violated zoning of CEQA requirements. See also Coalition for a Sustainable Future in… Read More
Plaintiff, a jewelry store, stated a viable breach of contract action against Sotheby's. Plaintiff owned $4 million in diamonds which it had obtained from Rechnitz as security for his debt. Plaintiff and Rechnitz met with a Sotheby's agent, giving him the diamonds to have appraised for possible auction at Sotheby's. Sotheby's form contract referred to only a single consignor, but… Read More
Plaintiff sued insurer #1, claiming it owed a duty to defend him against a suit by a conservation land trust that he had violated the trust's conservation easement over his land by various development activities he undertook on the property. That suit resulted in a judgment for the insurer, affirmed on appeal, denying coverage on the ground that the suit… Read More
Plaintiff leased a commercial property from defendant. The lease gave plaintiff an option to buy the property at its fair market value. Plaintiff exercised the option but the parties disagreed about the fair market value. After much litigation, the trial court set the price and ordered the parties to perform, but before they could do so, the Department of Transportation… Read More
On remand after reversal of an order dismissing the complaint (Sicre De Fontbrune v. Wolfsy (9th Cir. 2016) 838 F.3d 992), this decision reverses a summary judgment in defendant's favor refusing to enforce a French judgment for "astreinte" damages for using photos of Picasso paintings infringing plaintiff's copyright in the photos. The French judgment that plaintiff sought to enforce was… Read More
In international diversity cases, enforceability of judgments of courts of other countries is generally governed by the law of the state in which enforcement is sought. Read More
Plaintiff lacked Article III standing to challenge the FTC's opinion letter which took the position that use of soundboard technology on collection calls involved use of prerecorded messages that violated the FTC Telemarketing Sales Rule. The complaint did not allege that plaintiff had any concrete plans to violate the FTC's new interpretation of its Telemarketing Sales Rule. Read More
The district court dismissed plaintiff's complaint without prejudice, acknowledging that amendment might not be futile. Nevertheless, the district court did not grant leave to amend and entered judgment the same day against plaintiff. This decision holds that, viewing the record as a whole, the district court intended to end the case, making its dismissal order final and appealable even though… Read More
Bucking the trend and disagreeing with United Talent Agency v. Vigilant Ins. Co. (2022) 77 Cal.App.5th 821, this decision holds that the trial court erred in sustaining the insurer's motion to dismiss this suit seeking coverage under a CGL policy's business interruption coverage for losses sustained by reason of COVID-19. It reasons that however improbable it may now seem, on… Read More
Plaintiff, who was not a licensed real estate agent or broker, adequately alleged facts that could give rise to an estoppel to plead the statute of frauds as a defense to her claim for breach of an oral contract to pay her a finder's fee in connection with the sale of real property. Plaintiff alleged that in reliance on the… Read More
Recognizing a divergence of opinions on this point, this decision follows Rice v. Crow (2000) 81 Cal.App.4th 725 and Le Parc Community Assn. v. Workers’ Comp. Appeals Bd. (2003) 110 Cal.App.4th 1161 in holding that the bare voluntary pre-trial dismissal of a lawsuit (pursant to settlement with less than all defendants) with prejudice does not result in the “actual litigation”… Read More
A person who was not named as a defendant in the prior action, who did not formally intervene as a defendant in that action, and who was not treated as a defendant by the court or the plaintiff, has no standing to sue for malicious prosecution in filing or pursuing the prior action, even if he filed an answer in… Read More
Distinguishing United States v. Jones (2012) 132 S.Ct. 945 and Carpenter v. United States (2018) 138 S. Ct. 2206, this decision holds that LADOT's collection of location data from rented escooters doesn't violate the Fourth Amendment or state law because escooters are not essential to modern life and information about their location doesn't follow a single user throughout his ordinary… Read More
Over a strong dissent, this decision holds that the complaint in this case alleged a true sale by plaintiff rather than a disguised financing arrangement and thus stated a claim against the distributor's transferees under the Perishable Agricultural Commodities Act. Read More
