In a 4-3 decision, the California Supreme Court has found specific jurisdiction over the product liability claims of nonresidents against Bristol-Myers Squibb Company (BMS), a Delaware company headquartered in New York with substantial operations in New Jersey. Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. v. Superior Court (Anderson), S221038. It was undisputed that California plaintiffs had specific jurisdiction for … Continue Reading
In Gaines v. Fidelity National Title Ins. Co., S215990, a divided California Supreme Court (5-2) upheld the dismissal of this case for failure to bring the matter to trial within five years, as required by Code of Civil Procedure § 583.310. In doing so, the Supreme Court affirmed the lower courts and rejected plaintiff’s argument … Continue Reading
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
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
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
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
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
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
This afternoon, the Illinois Supreme Court published its Call of the Docket for the November term, and the Court will hear oral argument in fifteen civil cases. The cases, with the issue or issues presented in each, are: November 10: General Motors Corp. v. Pappas, No. 108893 – (1) Does the 2005 amendment to the Property … Continue Reading
The Supreme Court has granted review in two civil cases: Aryeh v. Canon Business Solutions, Inc., S184929, in which the Court will address the application of the continuing violation doctrine, the continuous accrual doctrine, and the delayed discovery rule to actions brought under the Unfair Competition Law (Bus. & Prof. Code, § 17200 et seq.). For … Continue Reading
The Court will hear oral argument on four civil cases this November, addressing a variety of issues: Cassel v. Superior Court. (Wasserman, Comden, Casselman & Pearson),S178914: (1) Are the private conversations of an attorney and client for the purpose of mediation entitled to confidentiality under Evid. Code §§1115 through 1128? (2) Is an attorney a … 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
The California Supreme Court has accepted review in Rossa v. D.L. Falk Construction, to review the issue of whether California Rules of Court, rule 8.278(d)(1)(F), which permits a successful appellant to recover "the cost to obtain a letter of credit as collateral," allows the recovery of interest paid on sums borrowed to fund a letter … 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
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 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
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 conference Wednesday (see list of actions), the Court granted review in Save the Plastic Bag Coalition v. City of Manhattan Beach, in which the Court of Appeal upheld vacating a city ordinance banning the use of plastic bags because an environmental impact report was not prepared. See the Environmental update page. In addition, … Continue Reading
In conference today (see list of actions), the Court granted review in Brown v. Mortensen, in which the Court of Appeal found that the Fair Credit Reporting Act preempted the restrictions imposed by the Confidentiality of Medical Information Act. See B & P 17200/Class Actions/Commercial update page. In addition, the Court also requested supplemental briefing … Continue Reading
[UPDATED THROUGH September 6, 2016] J & J Ventures Gaming, LLC v. Wild, Inc. Supreme Court Case Number: 119870 Appellate Court: Fifth District Appellate Court Case Number: 5-14-0092 Issues Presented: (1) Is the dispute between the plaintiff, defendant and intervenor regarding whether or not the plaintiff has a valid “written use agreement” within the meaning … Continue Reading
