The Court has recently granted review in two civil cases: Ralphs Grocery v. United Food & Commercial Workers Union, S185544, in which the Court of Appeal, formerly 186 Cal.App.4th 1078, held that the state cannot force the owner or possessor of real property that is not a public forum to give an uninvited group (in … Continue Reading
The California Supreme Court has released its annual report describing the operations of the Court from 2009 to 2010. The Court issued 105 opinions in this period, 42 of which were in civil cases. However, this does not account for the 30 habeas corpus petitions denied by order, so the court’s workload continues to be … Continue Reading
Pineda v. Bank of America addresses the controlling statute of limitations over a claim to recover penalties for the late payment of final wages and whether such penalties can be recovered under Bus. & Prof. Code § 17203. For more details on Pineda, see the Employment – Compensation & Benefits update page. Conservatorship of Roy … Continue Reading
The Supreme Court has granted review to again address preemption, this time in the timely area of consumer protection and banking. In Parks v. MBNA American Bank, the Court of Appeal reversed a judgment on the pleadings, finding that Civil Code § 1748.9, a state consumer protection law which mandates specific notice requirements regarding the … Continue Reading
This case arises out of an insured’s claim against its insurer for property damages caused by an earthquake that struck the Los Angeles area in 1984. After a protracted dispute (during which the insurer made substantial payments) over the value of the claimed damages, and the extent to which they were earthquake-related, the parties entered … Continue Reading
The California Commission on Judicial Appointments has unanimously confirmed the nomination of Associate Justice Tani Gorre Cantil-Sakauye, of the Third Appellate District of the Court of Appeal (Sacramento), as the new Chief Justice of California. In the same session, the Commission also confirmed by unanimous vote: The appointment of Judge Louis R. Mauro, of the … Continue Reading
In a case brought to enforce a settlement reached at mediation, a dispute arose about the final terms of the settlement reached. One of the parties offered the declaration of the mediator to confirm the accuracy of the attached agreement. In Radford v. Shehorn, the Second District Court of Appeal held this was inadmissible under … Continue Reading
Murray v. Alaska Airlines, Inc. holds that collateral estoppel applies to the administrative findings of a federal agency when those findings were subject to objection and judicial review that was never pursued, resulting in a final nonappealable order based on those findings. The Court found that in a subsequent civil lawsuit, those administrative findings have … Continue Reading
Labor Code § 351 bars an employer from collecting any gratuity that is left for an employee. Previous cases have addressed whether various tip pooling systems (i.e. systems which pool gratuities for division among a set of employees) operated by the employer are permitted under Labor Code § 351. Facing a split in the Court … Continue Reading
California "California Supreme Court" Employment "Attorneys Fees" Fees "Civil Procedure" Corporations "Choice of Law" Delaware "Private Attorney General" "Health Benefits" "Implicit Contract"… Continue Reading
In Clark v. Superior Court, the Supreme Court considered the claims of elderly plaintiffs under California’s unfair competition law, Business & Professions Code, § 17200 et seq., which sought treble damages under Civil Code § 3345. Under Civil Code § 3345, which is part of the Consumers Legal Remedies Act, the trier of fact is … Continue Reading
In Reid v. Google, the California Supreme Court addressed and resolved a well-known procedural trap for California attorneys: if you file your objections to your opponent’s evidence on a summary judgment motion, but the trial court never specifically rules on them, are the objections preserved on appeal? The Supreme Court’s answer: “yes.” In opposing a … Continue Reading
California, like most states, has enacted a statute (Civil Code section 846) which provides that property owners have no duty to maintain their premises in a manner that makes them “safe” for recreational users of the land. The statute was intended to encourage landowners to make their property available for recreational use without fear of … Continue Reading
Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger has named Associate Justice Tani Cantil-Sakauye of the California Court of Appeal as his choice to replace the retiring Hon. Ronald M. George as Chief Justice of the California Supreme Court. Governor Schwarzenegger praised Justice Cantil-Sakauye’s record in announcing the nomination: Justice Tani Cantil-Sakauye has a distinguished history of public service and understands … Continue Reading
California Chief Justice Ronald M. George has announced today that he will be retiring from the Court, effective January 2, 2011. We will have a profile of this great California jurist soon.… Continue Reading
In Tverberg v. Fillner Construction, Inc., the Supreme Court resolved a conflict in the lower courts by holding that the peculiar risk doctrine does not make a hiring party liable for workplace injuries of an independent contractor or subcontractor. In doing so, the Court departed from the rationale in Privette, holding instead that an independent … Continue Reading
In Kleffman v. Vonage Holdings Corp., the Court addressed a legal question from the Ninth Circuit regarding the application of Business and Professions Code §17529.5(a)(2) to spam e-mails that were being sent from multiple domain names to avoid spam filters. While this statute bars spam which “contains or is accompanied by falsified, misrepresented, or forged … Continue Reading
Last week the Supreme Court granted review in six civil cases, covering a wide variety of issues: Coito v. Superior Court, which addresses when witness statements are protected from discovery as work product. See Civil Procedure/Evidence/Discovery update. Professional Engineers in California Government v. Schwarzenegger, which the Supreme Court transferred on its own motion before … Continue Reading
In Martinez, the unanimous California Supreme Court affirmed the rulings of the lower courts by rejecting an attempt by agricultural workers to collect unpaid wages from food distributors who bought produce from that farm. In doing so, the court reviewed the history and jurisdiction of the Industrial Welfare Commission (IWC) and its work orders from … Continue Reading
In March 2009, the California Supreme Court granted review in Hertz to address the issue of whether a worker’s inability to participate in vocational rehabilitation due to nonindustrial causes should be apportioned under Labor Code sections 4663 and 4664, as they were amended in 2004 by SB 899. The Court of Appeal had ruled … Continue Reading
In Simpson Strong-Tie Company, Inc., a manufacturer brought suit against an attorney who ran an advertisement regarding possible claims against the manufacturer’s products and the trial court granted counsel’s anti-SLAPP motion to strike. The California Supreme Court has now affirmed the judgment, holding that: 1) the plaintiff has the burden of proof in demonstrating the application … Continue Reading
In its weekly conference, see list of actions, the California Supreme Court granted review in: Jankey v. Lee, in which the Court of Appeal held that the Americans with Disabilities Act does not preempt Civil Code § 55, which entitles the prevailing defendant to attorney’s fees upon defeating a claim for injunctive relief under the … Continue Reading
The California Supreme Court has scheduled oral argument in seven civil cases, five at the end of May and two in Los Angeles at the beginning of June. These hearings should address a wide variety of issues, including: Do employees have a private right of action against employers who take some of the tips? See … Continue Reading
In Runyon, the unanimous California Supreme Court ruled that whistleblowers employed with California State University do not have to exhaust their judicial remedies (i.e., petition for a writ of mandate) to bring a suit for damages, so long as they first exhaust their administrative remedies. While this ruling is consistent with previous whistleblower rulings by … Continue Reading
