Plaintiff stated a viable 10b-5 action against Google's holding company based on its 10-Q which disclosed generic cybersecurity risks as a threat to the company, but didn't disclose that Google had discovered three glitches in its Google+ programming that had exposing user personal data to an unknown group of program developers over a period of three years. Also, Google misleadingly… Read More
Compensation for expected but unearned future income to which the plaintiff has no legal entitlement is not recoverable as restitution under the UCL, regardless whether it is characterized as lost market share. Lost profits are damages, not restitution, and are unavailable in a private action under the UCL. Here, the trial court properly dismissed plaintiff optometrist's UCL claim against a… Read More
The anti-suit and other injunctions entered when Castlepoint was placed in receivership under the California Insurance Commissioner did not prevent suit by shareholders of a related entity against other related entities and their controlling officers and directors on claims of breach of contract (to which Castlepoint was not a party), tortious interference with that same contract, and breach of fiduciary… Read More
Plaintiff's subcontract with defendant, the prime contractor, incorporated by reference the 151-page prime contract between defendant and the owner. The prime contract contained an arbitration clause. The subcontract did not. This decision affirms an order denying arbitration. The incorporation of the prime contract was in a clause referring only to the subcontractor's assuming the prime contractor's obligations to the owner. … Read More
Like Board of Registered Nursing v. Superior Court (2021) 59 Cal.App.5th 1011, this writ proceeding arises from Johnson & Johnson's discovery in the county's opioid UCL, FAL and public nuisance action. J&J subpoenaed several non-party counties to produce records of opioid prescriptions and drug treatment records with intact personal identification information to J&J's third party vendor for it to de-identify… Read More
Civ. Code 3287(b) gives the trial judge broad discretionary power to award prejudgment interest in contract cases even when the damages are not certain or capable of being made certain. Uncertainty of damages alone would not be a proper reason to deny discretionary prejudgment interest under section 3287(b), but here, the trial judge also relied on the fact that the… Read More
The trial court properly admitted HP's expert's lost profits opinion. Unlike the plaintiff in Sargon Enterprises, Inc. v. University of Southern California (2012) 55 Cal.4th 747, HP was an established business. The expert had based his opinion on HP's past performance data and considered multiple variables including new product offerings by competing manufacturers. The expert's projection of lost profits five… Read More
Oracle breached its contract with HP by announcing that its next product releases would not be compatible with HP's Itanium computers. Following the first phase of trial in this case, the trial court concluded that the parties' contract required Oracle to offer Itanium-compatible versions of its product releases. Oracle then announced that it would release Itanium-compatible versions, but also announced… Read More
Having agreed to maintain its strategic relationship with HP and support of their shared customer base, by continuing to offer its product suite on HP platforms, Oracle six months later announced that its next product releases would not be available for HP computers. This decision holds that the announcement was a present breach of the parties' agreement, not an anticipatory… Read More
To settle disputes that arose from Oracle's hiring HP's former CEO, the two signed a settlement agreement containing a "reaffirmation" clause that stating each company’s commitment to their strategic relationship and support of their shared customer base, and that Oracle "“will continue to offer its product suite on HP platforms.” This lengthy opinion holds that the quoted words committed Oracle… Read More
An independent insurance agent that transacts business with many insurance companies is an agent of the insured, not any of the insurance companies, more akin to an insurance broker than a true insurance agent. The insurer owes no duty of care to supervise such an agent and is not liable for the agent's torts. In determining whether an applicant meets… Read More
An indigent prisoner filed this medical malpractice case, claiming that the defendant doctor had failed to tighten a screw in the artificial elbow he implanted in plaintiff's right arm, with the result that the screw came loose, causing serious injury to plaintiff's arm. The trial court denied plaintiff's motion for appointment of a lawyer and a medical expert. This opinion… Read More
This decision contains a lengthy discussion of requirements contracts and how they should be interpreted. The only appealed issue was the amount of damages that plaintiff should recover for the defendant's breach of the contract. The trial court had limited damages to a three month period before trial; whereas, the plaintiff sought damages for the entire period after the defendant… Read More
Under 9 USC 4, the district court must hold a summary jury trial if a party timely demands a jury and the district court finds, on a motion to compel arbitration, that there are disputed issues of fact as to whether the plaintiff entered into or is otherwise bound by an arbitration clause. Here, the district court so found, but… Read More
Distinguishing Law v. Siegel (2014) 134 S.Ct. 1188, this decision holds that a bankruptcy court may apply claim and issue preclusion doctrines to bar later assertion of exemptions it has already denied. Here, Albert claimed two exemptions when she originally filed her Chapter 13 petition. A creditor objected, and the bankruptcy court denied the exemptions. Albert failed to appeal. Later,… Read More
Plaintiff's faithless manager embezzled $154,000 by taking checks payable to plaintiff, endorsing them with a squiggle that might have approximated his name, and depositing them in his own account at JPMorgan. Because the deposits were by ATM and each check was for less than $1,500, no human inspected them. Held, the trial court erred in granting JPMorgan summary judgment. JPMorgan… Read More
Under 28 USC 1367(d), an applicable state statute of limitations is tolled for a period of 30 days after the claim is dismissed from a federal lawsuit on the ground that the district court declines to exercise jurisdiction over the case. This decision holds that the 30 day period does not begin to run on entry of the judgment of… Read More
Gov. Code 12965(b) is an exception to the normal cost provisions of CCP 1032. Hence, when, as in this case, the plaintiff loses her FEHA claims but prevails on other claims, she is not entitled to recover costs incurred solely in relation to the FEHA claims. Also, since the total recovery in this case was less than the amount that… Read More
When an employee is the prevailing party on claims for minimum or overtime wages, she is entitled to a reasonable attorney fee on the claim pursuant to Lab. Code 1194. That section prevails over Lab. Code 1031, which would otherwise limit the attorney fee to 20% of the recovery if the employee recovers less than $300. The two statutes conflict,… Read More
11 USC 108(c) extends time limits (such as statutes of limitation) for actions against the debtor until 30 period after the automatic stay in bankruptcy is vacated. This decision holds that 108(c) extends the 10-year period in which a judgment creditor may apply for renewal of the judgment under CCP 683.130. The majority opinion also disagrees with In re Lobherr… Read More
