California Appellate Tracker

Defendant violated the Unruh Act (Civ. Code 51 and 51.5 by charging female car buyers 1% higher APR than it charged men when it bought their contracts from car dealers.  The Department has standing to sue for violations of the Unruh Act even if no one files a complaint with the Department.  The Department was not required to show "actual"… Read More

Agreeing with Moritz v. Universal City Studios LLC (2020) 54 Cal.App.5th 238, this decision holds that even when a contract's arbitration clause clearly and expressly delegates arbitrability questions to the arbitrator, the court must decide whether the plaintiff's claim is made under a different contract that lacks an arbitration clause.  Here, the bank sued to enforce a loan agreement in… Read More

A government tort claim must be signed by the claimant (or someone acting on his or her behalf) and be sent by the claimant to the government entity.  This decision holds that though plaintiff signed a government claim form at a chiropractor's office where she received treatment for injuries from the traffic accident that was the basis for the government… Read More

Following White v. Square, Inc. (2019) 7 Cal.5th 1019, this decision holds that the trial court did not err in instructing the jury and in submitting a special verdict form to them which required plaintiff to prove that she intended to use Omni Hotel's services by booking a reservation or use the website to ascertain Omni's prices and availability for… Read More

Neither an insurance agent nor an insurance company owes an insured or prospective insured a duty to tell the insured he needs other or additional insurance coverage unless (1) the agent misrepresents the nature, extent or scope of the coverage being offered or provided; (2) there is a request or inquiry by the insured for a particular type or extent… Read More

Deciding an issue left open in Trope v. Katz (1995) 11 Cal.4th 274, this decision holds that a plaintiff who is an attorney but represents only himself cannot recover attorney fees under a common fund theory of attorney fee recovery since he does not pay or incur liability for any attorney fees.  However, such a plaintiff is entitled to recover… Read More

An action under San Francisco's Tree Dispute Resolution Ordinance about a neighbor's tree that has grown to obstruct the plaintiff's view is an action in the nature of one for a continuing nuisance, even though obstruction of view by trees was not actionable at common law.  Accordingly, there is no statute of limitations on such an action since the harm… Read More

Plaintiff sued to dissolve several LLCs and close corporations.  Defendants invoked their right to buy plaintiff's interests in the companies at appraised value.  The parties stipulated to add five additional LLCs to the group of companies being appraised for buyout purposes even though plaintiff had not sued to dissolve them.  After the trial court entered a judgment setting the appraised… Read More

Plaintiff held a 25% membership interest in an LLC.  She brought suit to dissolve the LLC, which was stayed while the majority members exercised their right under Corp. Code 17707.03 to have plaintiff's share appraised and to buy her interest at the appraised value.  In an appraisal under that section, the trial court is not bound by the appraisers' award. … Read More

Explaining the California Supreme Court's relatively recent decisions dealing with the admissibility of expert testimony based on hearsay sources, this opinion explains that expert opinion is properly admissible if based on hearsay about background facts or principles of science and the like.  (See People v. Sanchez (2016) 63 Cal.4th 665; People v. Veamatahau (2020) 9 Cal.5th 16; People v. Valencia… Read More

This decision affirms dismissal of plaintiff's complaint on judicial estoppel grounds.  In prior litigation over the same award of rights to assign .africa URLs, plaintiff took the position before an international arbitration panel that plaintiff could not sue in court over the award.  That position was completely inconsistent with its current assertion of the right to sue in court over… Read More

The insureds were not entitled to Cumis counsel in the underlying personal injury case.  The insurer settled the case within policy limits and had reserved its rights only with respect to damages in excess of policy limits and punitive damages, both of which were clearly not covered--and nothing in the underlying action concerning those damages placed insurance defense counsel in… Read More

Ordinarily, when a complaint alleges a stand-alone claim for declaratory relief and properly alleges the existence of an existing controversy, the trial court should not grant a demurrer because the plaintiff is entitled to a declaration of rights even if unfavorable.  However, the error is not prejudicial if the declaration would be in the defendant's favor.  The appellate opinion affirming… Read More

In a direct listing, the issuing company files a registration statement with the SEC which then allows it to sell its registered shares directly to the public and allows its existing shareholders to do so as well.  Since direct listing does not involve bank financing of the issuance, there is no "lock up" period during which unregistered shares cannot be… Read More

While the ABC test of employee v. independent contractor status applies retroactively, Prop. 22's classification of some gig workers as independent contractors applies only prospectively.  So GrubHub drivers, if employees under the ABC test adopted in Dynamex Operations West, Inc. v. Superior Court (2018) 4 Cal.5th 903, are entitled to back wages for the period before Prop. 22's adoption.  The… Read More

Following O'Connor v. Uber Technologies, Inc. (9th Cir. 2018) 904 F.3d 1087, this decision affirms the district court's denial of class certification in a wage and hour case.  Plaintiff and one other worker did not, but all the other putative class members did, sign an arbitration agreement with defendant containing a class action waiver.  As a result, plaintiff was not… Read More

Following Rent-A-Center West Inc. v. Jackson (2010) 130 S.Ct. 2772 and Brennan v. Opus Bank (9th Cir. 2015) 796 F.3d 1125, this decision holds that when an arbitration agreement delegates issues of arbitrability to the arbitrator, a court's first task is to determine whether the delegation clause itself (rather than the entire arbitration agreement) is enforceable.  If the delegation clause… Read More

CCP 1161.3 provides that a landlord may not terminate a tenancy for (among other things) domestic violence committed against the tenant or a member of the tenant's household so long as the domestic violence is documented by, among other alternatives, a police report.  Over a dissent, this opinion holds that the statute provides a defense to an unlawful detainer action… Read More

Before and during his decade-long divorce proceedings, Piterman made monthly payments on two promissory notes to his friend Korchemny, who then with Piterman's encouragement and aid sued Piterman, his former wife and her trust to collect on the notes.  This opinion affirms a judgment against Korchemny on the complaint.  The first promissory note charged interest in excess of 10% and… Read More

Plaintiff adequately exhausted her administrative remedies under the FEHA by filing a complaint with the DFEH that nearly correctly named her employer's dba Hooman Chevrolet (instead of Hooman Chevrolet of Culver City) but got the corporate name of the employer wrong Hooman Enterprises, Inc. (instead of NBA Automotive, Inc.).  The administrative complaint also correctly named the plaintiff's supervisor and other… Read More