California Appellate Tracker

In this action under 42 USC 1983, B&G alleged that Embry violated B&G's free speech rights by suing it under California's Prop. 65 for failing to include on its packaging the Prop. 65 warning that B&G's cookies contained acrylamide, a chemical supposedly known to California to cause cancer.  The decision holds that in seeking to enjoin Embry from suing B&G,… Read More

This decision affirms a preliminary injunction issued against the California Attorney General and private parties preventing them from filing suit under Prop. 65 to require food manufacturers to give the standard Prop. 65 warning about acrylamide being a chemical supposedly "known" to cause cancer.  Under Zauderer v. Office of Disciplinary Counsel, 471 U.S. 626 (1985), the compelled speech (the required… Read More

Although an award of attorney fees to the plaintiff in a Public Records Act suit is mandatory if the plaintiff is the prevailing party (Gov. Code, 6259(d)), the trial court may exercise its discretion and deny a fee award if it concludes that the plaintiff obtained documents that are so minimal or insignificant as to justify a finding that the… Read More

The relationship between a medical resident and a hospital residency program is primarily an employment relationship, not a teaching relationship.  Accordingly, in judging a resident's claim that she was dismissed from the residency program due to gender discrimination and retaliation for her complaints about gender discrimination, the jury should not be instructed to give academic deference to the residency program's… Read More

Under the CLRA (Civ. Code 1792(b), no "action for damages" may be brought against a defendant that offers appropriate correction within 30 days of receiving the plaintiff's notice of violation of the statute.  This decision holds that "action for damages" includes--and the subsection therefore bars--any claim for compensatory damages or for restitution under the CLRA.  The decision also holds that… Read More

In most arbitrations, the arbitrator decides any issues regarding discovery.  Not so in uninsured/underinsured motorist arbitrations under Ins. Code 11580.2(f).  The court decides discovery issues in those types of arbitration proceedings.  This decision holds that the trial court's discovery rulings cannot be challenged on an appeal from an order confirming the arbitration award because error in discovery rulings by a… Read More

This decision holds that Lab. Code 925 is enforceable in federal court.  A California employee who was  not represented by counsel when he signed an employment agreement may void clauses in the contract that choose another state as the forum or another state's law as applicable law.  Having done so, the employee may enforce the contract in federal court, cleansed… Read More

The trial court made four errors in granting Amazon judgment in this Prop. 65 action against it based on its listing (and sale) of 11 skin whiting products that contained mercury.  First, it improperly found that tests of individual samples of the products didn't prove that all of the product contained mercury.  The test results showed mercury levels so high… Read More

An order unconditionally granting or denying a motion for relief from the automatic stay in bankruptcy is final and appealable.  The 14-day window for filing an appeal from the order opens when the order is filed.  Stay relief is a proceeding separate from, and precedes, claim resolution. Read More

The Court of Appeal initially reversed a judgment in the plaintiff's favor, finding that the insurance agent who fraudulently induced plaintiff to enter into unsuitable annuities rather than the life insurance he had requested was an insurance broker, not a true agent, and that the insurer defendant therefore was not liable for the agent's fraud.  The Supreme Court granted review… Read More

A musician's use of an eight note sequence at a steady rhythm involved only common musical elements and was not copyrightable.  Hence, the district court correctly granted JMOL against the musician's claim that the defendant infringed his copyright by copying the first six of his eight note repeated musical figure in her song. Read More

The operator of a residential care facility owed its severely retarded resident a duty of care s to take cost-effective measures to protect the resident from foreseeable harm from people like the handyman who sexually assaulted her and who the facility knew posed a foreseeable risk of harm to its female residents.) Read More

A severely retarded resident of a care facility sued it for damages suffered in a sexual assault by a handyman on the facility's premises.  The decision holds that the trial court abused its discretion in excluding portions of a police report which the plaintiff relied on in opposition to the facility's summary judgment motion.  The police report was excepted from… Read More

An "order" that dismisses or denies a petition for a writ of administrative mandamus is a final, appealable judgment if it leaves nothing to be resolved other than compliance with the order--even though the order is labeled "order," not "judgment."  The deadline for appealing the decision runs from service of notice of entry of such an order, not from the… Read More

Unlike disqualification under CCP 170.1 or 170.3, peremptory disqualification under CCP 170.6 does not void orders that the disqualified judge entered before the 170.6 affidavit was filed. Read More

Under W&I Code 15657.03, a court may issue a restraining order to prevent a defendant from committing threatened or repeated physical or financial elder abuse. Here, the trial court did not abuse its discretion in entering such an order against a step child who, along with her mother, tried to unduly influence the mother's elderly husband to change his estate… Read More

The trial court instructed the jury to award plaintiff defendant's profits from the false advertising the jury found only if it found that the defendant acted wilfully.  This instruction was contrary to the Supreme Court's later holding in Romag Fasteners, Inc. v. Fossil Group, Inc. (2020) 140 S.Ct. 1492.  So the jury verdict was reversed and remanded.  However, disgorgement of… Read More

Plaintiffs alleging parallel conduct among competitors as a Sherman Act section 1 conspiracy must allege additional facts (plus factors) that place that parallel conduct in a context suggesting a preceding agreement.  Here, only one of the eight plus factors plaintiffs alleged weighed slightly in favor of conspiracy, which was insufficient to cross the threshold from possible to plausible.  The three… Read More

Largely affirming Walgren v. Coleco Industries, Inc. (1984) 151 Cal.App.3d 543, this decision holds that, in general, testimony given in a discovery deposition in a prior case cannot be introduced at trial under Evid. Code 1291(a)(2) in another against a party present at the deposition because the motives and interest of a party at a deposition generally is dissimilar from… Read More

The Supreme Court holds that lenders and loan servicers do not owe borrowers a duty of care in handling their loan modification applications.  Lender and borrower are in privity of contract, and the economic loss rule prevents recovery for purely economic loss based on negligence between contracting parties.  The Biakanja factors apply only to parties not in privity of contract. … Read More