The California Supreme Court has scheduled oral arguments for May, including four civil cases. Brown v. Mortensen: The Court will address whether the Federal Credit Reporting Act (15 U.S.C. § 1681 et seq.) preempts causes of action for the improper disclosure of medical information under California’s Confidentiality of Medical Information Act (Civ. Code, § 56 et … Continue Reading
The California Supreme Court has granted review in Ennabe v. Manosa, S189577, in which the Second District Court of Appeal upheld a summary judgment for defendant, who hosted a party at a private residence where alcoholic beverages were available and who charged uninvited party guests an entrance fee of $3 to $5. The Court of … Continue Reading
In Cevallos v. Rideout, No. SC09-2238 (review granted Apr. 20, 2010), the Florida Supreme Court must determine how, or if, the rebuttable presumption that a rear-driver was the sole, proximate cause of rear-end collision applies when the rear-driver was the plaintiff. The lower court decision is reported at 18 So. 3d 661 (Fla. 4th DCA … Continue Reading
The Illinois Supreme Court has announced that on the morning of Thursday, March 24th, it will file opinions in five civil cases (pdf): Williams v. Board of Review, No. 109469—Was terminated employee entitled to a good cause extension of the statutory deadline requiring that an eligible worker must enroll in an approved training program within … Continue Reading
The Texas Legislature is currently considering House Bill 274, containing several measures that could alter the landscape of civil litigation. HB274 would, if enacted: Require the Texas Supreme Court to adopt rules creating a motion-to-dismiss practice patterned on Rules 9 and 12 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (Texas currently does not have a … Continue Reading
Oasis West Realty v. Goldman (S181781) – Does an attorney’s duty of loyalty owed to a former client apply when the attorney actively takes a position against the former client on the same issue for which the lawyer previously had been retained, but does so while acting on his or her own behalf, without a … Continue Reading
This afternoon, the Illinois Supreme Court published its Call of the Docket [pdf] for the March term, and the Court will hear oral argument in six civil cases. The cases, with the issue or issues presented in each, are: March 16: Sheffler v. Commonwealth Edison Co.,No. 110166 – Does a complaint seeking both injunctive relief and … Continue Reading
On January 18, 2011, the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals in Essex Insurance Co. v. Zota (.pdf) brought an end to seven years of litigation and four appellate proceedings, when it affirmed a final declaratory judgment entered in favor of a surplus lines insurer, Essex Insurance Company, following a jury trial. Although the Eleventh Circuit’s … Continue Reading
Insurance – In Century-National Ins. Co. v. Jesus Garcia, the court held that a fire insurance policy could not exclude coverage for innocent insureds because of the intentional acts of another insured; in this case the intentional act of the son setting fire to his parents house. The policy excluded coverage based on the intentional … Continue Reading
Before profiling potential candidates to replace Justice Moreno on the California Supreme Court, we first provide a brief profile of the remaining court – not including Justice Moreno, whose announced retirement has initiated this discussion. When choosing a new member for the high court, there is often a discussion about what is “missing” from the … Continue Reading
In Cassel v. Superior Court (Wasserman Comden Casselman & Pearson), the California Supreme Court evaluated the mediation confidentiality created by Evidence Code, § 1119, which prevents the admission of “evidence of anything said,” or any “writing” which was prepared “for the purpose of, in the course of, or pursuant to, a mediation. . . .”, … Continue Reading
After serving the California courts for twenty-four years, Associate Justice Carlos R. Moreno has announced his retirement from the court. In a recent interview, Justice Moreno said that recent changes, including the retirement of Chief Justice Ronald George and the election of Governor Jerry Brown, had prodded him to explore other possibilities. His retirement creates an … Continue Reading
The CA Supreme Court has scheduled three civil cases for hearing on February 8, 2011. These cases address issues of duty & causation, the statute of limitations for multiple distinct injuries and the final judgment rule. Pooshs v. Philip Morris USA, Inc., et al., S172023, results from a request for guidance from the Ninth Circuit … Continue Reading
Justice Carlos Moreno of the California Supreme Court announced today that he will be retiring from the Court, effective February 28, 2011. The surprise announcement, coming on the heels of Chief Justice Ronald M. George’s retirement, gives new Governor Jerry Brown his first Supreme Court appointment only days into his term.… Continue Reading
For the final day of our profile of retiring California Chief Justice Ronald M. George, we offer our own subjective list of the Chief Justice’s most notable opinions. If anyone has a nomination for a favorite case that belongs on this list – and there are many important opinions that aren’t here – explain in the … Continue Reading
In the first two posts of this series, we’ve reviewed Chief Justice George’s career prior to his judicial service, and his early years as a Judge of the Los Angeles Superior Court and a Justice of the Court of Appeals. Today, we turn to a review of the Chief’s more than eighteen years on the California Supreme … Continue Reading
Yesterday, in the first post of this series, we considered Chief Justice George’s career prior to his elevation to the bench. Today, we continue with the Chief’s service on the trial bench and the California Court of Appeal. The Chief Justice was appointed to the Los Angeles Municipal Court on April 20, 1972 by Governor Ronald … Continue Reading
On January 3, 2011, the twenty-seventh Chief Justice of California, Ronald M. George, will conclude over thirty-eight years of service on the California bench. To mark the retirement of this great California jurist, we begin a four part profile on state’s third longest-serving Chief Justice. Born in March 1940, Chief Justice George graduated from Beverly Hills … Continue Reading
Resolving an express conflict between the District Courts of Appeal, the Florida Supreme Court held that when a party objects to instances of attorney misconduct during trial, and the objection is sustained, the party must also timely move for a mistrial in order to preserve the issue for a trial court’s review of a motion … Continue Reading
Following the recent retirement of Justices Scotland and Sims, as well as the elevation of Justice Tani Cantil Sakauye to the California Supreme Court, the California Commission on Judicial Appointments has now confirmed four appointments for the Third Appellate District. First, Associate Justice Vance W. Raye, who has served on the Court of Appeal, Third Appellate … Continue Reading
While avoiding the marijuana legalization debates raging in the state, the California Supreme Court confirmed that orders compelling five medical marijuana dispensaries to comply with subpoenas issued by the City of Dana Point were appealable, reversing the dismissal by the Court of Appeal in these consolidated cases. In Dana Point Safe Harbor Collective v. Superior … Continue Reading
Under Texas law, the public has an easement to access dry beaches. This easement extends landward to the vegetation line. A recent Texas Supreme Court case examined the validity of the easement when a hurricane suddenly alters the beachfront. The property owner had constructed a house behind the vegetation line in the West Beach area … Continue Reading
Code of Civil Procedure § 1021.5 allows for the recovery of attorney fees from the opposition under certain circumstances when a successful litigant acts as a private attorney general. While it was well established that a financial interest in the matter can disqualify a party from an award under § 1021.5, it was disputed as … Continue Reading
Conditional settlement agreements between a plaintiff and a codefendant are nothing new. But when such an agreement is premised on the notion that the “settling” codefendant will continue to defend itself at trial, diminishing its own liability proportionately by increasing the liability of the other codefendants, it is against public policy. The term “Mary Carter … Continue Reading
