California Appellate Tracker

An appeal automatically stays a mandatory injunction, but not a prohibitory injunction.  Here, the trial court ordered the San Bernardino Board of Supervisors to remove and replace one of its sitting members based on the trial court's finding that the board had violated the Brown Act (Gov. Code 54950) requiring open meetings.  A mandatory injunction is one that commands a… Read More

A defendant may be held liable for negligent entrustment of a vehicle and negligent hiring of the employee who drives it if the employer fails to make a reasonable effort to determine whether the employee has a valid driver's license before allowing him to drive the vehicle.  See Veh. Code 14604, 14606(a).) Read More

Under Family Code 1615, a premarital agreement must be signed by an independent lawyer on behalf of a party that is otherwise unrepresented by counsel in connection with the agreement.  Absent signature by an independent lawyer, the premarital agreement is void, not voidable, and cannot be ratified by the unrepresented spouse's later conduct.  Also parties cannot circumvent the independent counsel… Read More

Following Esparza v. KS Industries, L.P. (2017) 13 Cal.App.5th 1228, this decision holds that an employee cannot be compelled under a predispute arbitration clause to arbitrate a PAGA claim.  The FAA does not preempt this rule.  The employer failed to show that the employee who filed the suit was employed under a collective bargaining agreement so the LMRA  301 did… Read More

Straumann, a Swiss company, and its Swiss-resident officer, Hemm, established purposeful contacts with California by entering into an agreement to be the exclusive distributor outside the United States for Rodo, a California company making dental products.  Hemm was a member of Rodo's board at the time, but negotiated the exclusive distributorship as Straumann's agent.  Rodo's shareholders sued claiming that Rodo's… Read More

The D'Amico v. Board of Medical Examiners (1974) 11 Cal.3d 1 doctrine about summary judgment affidavits not being allowed to contradict admissions in discovery is not a doctrine regarding the admissibility of evidence, but rather whether the contradictory evidence can be given an weight.  Here, an expert changed his answer on the key question of whether a plaintiff was exposed… Read More

Hom entered into a lease with tenant.  The lease granted extensive rights to lenders to tenant, including performing tenant's obligations and assuming its rights under the lease.  Tenant sued Hom who cross-complained against tenant and Petrou, a lender to tenant.  As part of his settlement with tenant, Hom dismissed his cross-complaint against Petrou as well.  Petrou was awarded attorney fees… Read More

The district court correctly denied plaintiff's motion for a preliminary injunction before compelling arbitration of the plaintiff's wage-and-hour misclassification claims.  Plaintiff had sought an injunction requiring Uber to reclassify all its drivers as employees rather than independent contractors.  That injunction would have changed, not preserved, the status quo pending arbitration.  Also, there was no urgent need for an injunction before… Read More

The district court correctly compelled arbitration in this wage-and-hour misclassification suit by a Massachusetts Uber driver.  Even assuming Massachusetts would follow McGill v. Citibank, N.A. (2017) 2 Cal.5th 945, plaintiff did not seek a public injunction with McGill's meaning.  Instead, plaintiff sought only an injunction that would benefit himself and other Uber drivers, but not the general public, by requiring… Read More

The trial court correctly compelled arbitration of this Massachusetts Uber driver's wage and hour class action, based on alleged misclassification of Uber drivers as independent contractors.  For purposes of determining whether the plaintiff was a worker in interstate commerce, exempt from the FAA under 9 USC 2, the court properly considered the class of all Uber drivers nationwide, not just… Read More

Google settled part of a class action, paying some class members $65 million and agreeing to separately pay plaintiffs' attorneys fees as awarded by the court.  Plaintiffs' attorneys appealed from the district court's fee award, claiming the district court should have awarded them more based on the common fund theory of fee awards rather than the lower sum it calculated… Read More

The trial court properly denied plaintiff prejudgment interest as the basis for computation of its damages was disputed.  It sought to hold defendants jointly and severally liable for defense costs in an underlying lawsuit.  It recovered much smaller several damages limited to costs of defending against claims arising from each defendant's own work. Read More

A subcontractor that agrees to indemnify the developer for claims arising from the subcontractor's own work is not jointly and severally liable for defense costs that cannot be specifically attributed to claims against particular subcontractors, such as status conferences and the like. Read More

Disagreeing with Pulte Home Corp. v. CBR Electric, Inc. (2020) 50 Cal.App.5th 216, this decision holds that while an insurer's right to proceed on its insured's claim under the doctrine of equitable subrogation is an equitable claim as to which there is no right to a jury trial, if the claim to which the insurer successfully becomes subrogated is a… Read More

Though noting a split of authority on the issue, this decision follows Lossing v. Superior Court (1989) 207 Cal.App.3d 635 in holding that a civil contempt proceeding brought to enforce discovery orders (in this case, post-judgment discovery orders) cannot form the basis of a later malicious prosecution action. Read More

A party seeking to vacate an arbitration award must file a petition to vacate or a response (to a petition to confirm) seeking vacation of the award within the shorter of 10 days after service of the petition to confirm or 100 days after service of the arbitration award.  (CCP 1288.2, 1290.6.)  Here, even though defendant filed a response to… Read More

Noting the split of authorities on this issue, this decision follows Cooksey v. Alexakis (2004) 123 Cal.App.4th 246 in holding that a party who seeks a continuance under section 437c(h), must show why the discovery necessary to oppose the motion for summary judgment or summary adjudication could not have been completed sooner, and accordingly requires the court to grant the… Read More

A statement of economic interests (Form 700) that California public officials must file is a "political work" for purposes of CCP 425.17(d)(2), and thus any claim arising from its creation, dissemination, exhibition, advertisement, or other similar promotion is not subject to CCP 425.17(b) which exempts from CCP 425.16 suits brought in the public interest.  This means that a claim based… Read More

A hospital peer review proceeding to discipline a staff physician is an official proceeding.  Statements made at the peer review proceeding are protected speech under CCP 425.16(e).  If the plaintiff doctor cannot show a probability of success on the merits of claims based on those statements, the claims must be stricken, but the doctor can still introduce the statements as… Read More

An easement to grow crops on and use land for pasturage was broad enough to permit the dominant tenant to grow grass and ornamental shrubs and plants in the easement.  The easement also allowed construction, maintenance and use of roads across but not along the easement.  This decision holds that that part of the easement allowed construction of three paved… Read More