California Appellate Tracker

This decision affirms a $2.7 million judgment in favor of two tenants against new landlords that harassed the tenants and then wrongfully evicted them in a fake owner move-in all in violation of San Francisco's rent control ordinance.  The ordinance provides for treble damages for violations like these, but the trial court properly exercised its discretion to reduce the trebled… Read More

Wife executed will that purported to sever joint tenancy ownership of real property held in the name of wife and husband.  The will directed that wife's estate be distributed equally to her five children.  Husband never probated wife's will after her death, and his will and trust distributed his estate to three of wife's five children who were his biological… Read More

Employment, Race/Ethnicity Discrimination, Unconscious Discrimination, Aversive Racism, 2, 8 This decision holds that race discrimination need not be consciously motivated by race in order to violate Title VII.  Unconscious application of racial stereotypes is enough to violate the statute.  However, expert testimony regarding such unconscious application of racial stereotypes does not prove race discrimination as a matter of law.  The… Read More

The trial court did not err in refusing to instruct the jury on superseding cause in this case.  Plaintiff's theory was that the defendant drug detox center was negligent in failing to prevent the foreseeable and successful suicide attempt by plaintiff's son.  A superseding cause must be one which a reasonable person would not foresee.  So, in order to find… Read More

Labor Code 206 and 206.5 require an employer to pay an employee all wages the employer concedes are due without condition and without any release of the employee's disputed claims, if any, to other wages.  Here, the employer conceded it owed plaintiff a bonus, but before paying it sent the plaintiff a 998 offer to settle all wage claims.  Held,… Read More

While CCP 1033.5(b)(3) generally disallows an award of costs for the expense of photocopying, section 1033.5(a)(13) allows an award of costs for preparation of exhibits "if reasonably helpful to aid the trier of fact."  This decision holds that "trier of fact" refers to any resolution by judge or jury of facts, whether on motion or at trial.  So the cost… Read More

A provision in an attorney's contingency fee agreement that purported to allow the attorney to consent on the client's behalf (and over the client's objection) to any settlement offer that the attorney thought was reasonable and in the client's best interest violated the Rules of Professional Conduct and was void.  Such a provision creates an immediate, direct conflict of interest… Read More

Gov. Code 53069.4 allows local governments to enforce their ordinances through an administrative process for imposing and collecting fines.  Unlike most administrative proceedings that may be reviewed only by a writ of administrative mandamus under CCP 1094.5, a citizen can appeal to the superior court from a decision by that administrative process within 20 days after the decision. (Gov. Code… Read More

Defendant was subject to specific personal jurisdiction in California though he was not an officer of dmarcian USA and demarcian EU, for which he worked, was a separate entity.  By publicly presenting himself as a leader of dmarcian, a company headquartered in California, having dmarcian EU’s web address automatically route to dmarcian’s Web site, administered in California, and receiving prospective… Read More

Chico is immune from liability for injuries plaintiff suffered when a limb of a 130-year-old oak tree fell on her while she was jogging in a city park.  While the park as a whole was improved property--with roads, running paths and picnic areas, the tree was unimproved.  Under Gov. Code 831.2, a governmental entity is immune from liability for an… Read More

While the presumption against retroactive application of new statutes is strong, figuring out what constitutes retroactive application may be difficult.  Here, the statute required a grace period and notice before terminating a life insurance policy for nonpayment of the premium.  Though it changed the terms of the policy, it governed only the insurer's actions after the effective date of the… Read More

Ins. Code 10113.71 and 10113.72 became effective on January 1, 2013.  They require life insurance companies to grant the insured a 60 day grace period after the due date of a premium payment in which to make up the payment and reinstate the policy.  The statutes also require the insurance company to notify the insured of an impending lapse or… Read More

Interpreting a nondisclosure agreement under English law, this decision holds that a clause stating that "this agreement shall terminate on a date 2 years from the date hereof" ended the entire agreement after two years, including the defendant's obligation not to disclose the trade secret information it had learned from plaintiff during the existence of the agreement.  This interpretation was… Read More

Under Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(k)(2), when the plaintiff sues on a federal cause of action and the defendant is not subject to personal jurisdiction in any state's courts of general jurisdiction, the federal courts may exercise personal jurisdiction over the defendant if it has minimum contacts with the United States as a whole under the same generally applicable tests… Read More

This decision holds that an order directing the defendant to pay half the costs of certain depositions to determine the number of additional depositions needed to obtain a reliable statistical sample of the class of employees suing for missed meal and rest breaks is not appealable under the collateral order doctrine.  Though the order directed the payment of money and… Read More

A court may abstain from adjudicating a suit that seeks equitable remedies if granting the requested relief would require a trial court to assume the functions of an administrative agency, or to interfere with the functions of an administrative agency.  Here, plaintiff sought injunctive relief against a local water service district to prevent a particular employee from operating its water… Read More

California could not exercise specific personal jurisdiction over a Virginia law firm and its lawyers.  The lawyers had done nothing to avail themselves of California's benefits.  They had a website with minimum interactivity not directed to California residents in particular but rather to veterans throughout the country.  The lawyers had Virginia bar licenses, not California ones.  Though plaintiff (their client)… Read More

Under the federal recalcitrant witness statute, 28 U.S.C. § 1826(a), when a witness refuses to testify or provide other information, including documentary evidence, the court “may summarily order his confinement . . . until such time as the witness is willing to give such testimony or provide such information.”  This decision holds that section 1826 applies to post-judgment as well… Read More

Under CCP 338(a), a three-year limitations period applies to an action on a liability created by statute other than a penalty or forfeiture.  This decision holds that the commencement of the three year period under section 338(a) can be tolled under the common law delayed discovery rule. Read More

Under CCP 361, if the claim arose in a foreign state and is barred by that state's statute of limitations, it is barred in California unless the plaintiff has been a citizen of California continuously from the accrual of the claim to the present and held the cause of action the whole time.  Here, Louisiana citizens sued for injuries sustained… Read More