Subscribe to California Appellate Tracker

Thank you for your desire to subscribe to Severson & Werson’s Appellate Tracker Weblog. In order to subscribe, you must provide a valid name and e-mail address. This too will be retained on our server. When you push the “subscribe button”, we will send an electronic mail to the address that you provided asking you to confirm your subscription to our Weblog. By pushing the “subscribe button”, you represent and warrant that you are over the age of 18 years old, are the owner/authorized user of that e-mail address, and are entitled to receive e-mails at that address. Our weblog will retain your name and e-mail address on its server, or the server of its web host. However, we won’t share any of this information with anyone except the Firm’s employees and contractors, except under certain extraordinary circumstances described on our Privacy Policy and (About The Consumer Finance Blog/About the Appellate Tracker Weblog) Page. NOTICE AND AGREEMENT REGARDING E-MAILS AND CALLS/TEXT MESSAGES TO LAND-LINE AND WIRELESS TELEPHONES: By providing your contact information and confirming your subscription in response to the initial e-mail that we send you, you agree to receive e-mail messages from Severson & Werson from time-to-time and understand and agree that such messages are or may be sent by means of automated dialing technology. If you have your email forwarded to other electronic media, including text messages and cellular telephone by way of VoIP, internet, social media, or otherwise, you agree to receive my messages in that way. This may result in charges to you. Your agreement and consent also extend to any other agents, affiliates, or entities to whom our communications are forwarded. You agree that you will notify Severson & Werson in writing if you revoke this agreement and that your revocation will not be effective until you notify Severson & Werson in writing. You understand and agree that you will afford Severson & Werson a reasonable time to unsubscribe you from the website, that the ability to do so depends on Severson & Werson’s press of business and access to the weblog, and that you may still receive one or more emails or communications from weblog until we are able to unsubscribe you.

Employer filed an untimely appeal from a Labor Commissioner ruling ordering the employer to pay a substantial sum to the plaintiff employee.  After the untimely appeal was dismissed, the trial court properly ordered the bond forfeited to the employee and entered judgment in the bond amount against the employer.  Though filing a bond is a prerequisite to the trial court's… Read More

This decision holds that CRC 2.259(c) and 8.77(d) both apply to excuse late filing of notices of appeal in appropriate circumstances.  Rule 2.259(c) requires a court to deem a document filed on the day of the attempted filing if a technical problem with the court's filing system prevents the filing.  Rule 8.77(d) allows a court to deem a document filed… Read More

A judgment is not one "on the merits" entitled to claim or issue preclusive effect if the appeal from the judgment is dismissed solely on the ground that the appeal is moot due to post-judgment events--such as, in this case, completion of the development project that allegedly violated zoning of CEQA requirements.  See also Coalition for a Sustainable Future in… Read More

Distinguishing Microsoft Corp. v. Baker (2017) 137 S.Ct. 1702, Langere v. Verizon Wireless Services, LLC (9th Cir. 2020) 983 F.3d 1115, and Sperring v. LLR, Inc. (9th Cir. 2021) 995 F.3d 680, which involved voluntary dismissals in order to appeal from class certification orders or orders compelling arbitration, as to which Rule 23(f) or 9 USC 16 prescribe different appellate… Read More

Appeals from probate orders did not automatically stay the parties' ability to settle their dispute.  Even though their settlement required dismissal of the pending appeals, the settlement was effective and did not violate the automatic stay on appeal under CCP 916. Read More

The automatic stay on appeal prevents the trial court from entering a voluntary dismissal of the action while the case is on appeal from an interlocutory order (such as here, an order denying an Anti-SLAPP motion) because dismissal of the case would affect the Court of Appeal's jurisdiction over the appeal.  Furthermore, even if it were otherwise effective, a voluntary… Read More

An order unconditionally granting or denying a motion for relief from the automatic stay in bankruptcy is final and appealable.  The 14-day window for filing an appeal from the order opens when the order is filed.  Stay relief is a proceeding separate from, and precedes, claim resolution. Read More

CCP 902 allows an appeal only by a party "aggrieved" by the appealed order or judgment.  Here, the watermaster appointed by the court to administer its judgment allocating water rights among claimants to the same river was not aggrieved and therefore lacked standing to appeal from a trial court order which interpreted the 60-year-old judgment allocating water rights among the… Read More

For a federal Court of Appeals to have jurisdiction over an interlocutory appeal under 28 USC 1292(b), the district court must first find that (a) there is a controlling question of law, (b) there are substantial grounds for difference of opinion on that question, and (c) immediate resolution of the question would materially advance the ultimate termination of the litigation. … Read More

The district court denied defendant's Anti-SLAPP motion to dismiss the first amended complaint's defamation claims but granted defendant's motion to dismiss the other claims with leave to amend.  Plaintiff filed a second amended complaint before defendant appealed from the order denying the Anti-SLAPP motion.  This decision holds that the filing of the second amended complaint mooted the appeal from the… Read More

On remand after a prior appeal decided in plaintiff's favor, the district court granted defendant summary judgment finding that defendant was not negligent or willful in including in its credit report mention of plaintiff's criminal charge that was filed more than 7 years before the credit report but was dismissed less than 7 years before the report.  This decision affirms… Read More

On an earlier appeal, the court held that the indemnity provision that the plaintiff required the defendant to sign in order to apply for approval of its development project was not supported by consideration and that plaintiff had no statutory authority to impose an indemnity agreement as a condition of plaintiff's statutory duty to consider defendant's application.  On this appeal,… Read More

Ordinarily, an order on a motion for an attorney fee award is appealable as a post-judgment order under CCP 904.1(a)(2).  But here, to maintain the trial court's jurisdiction to enforce a settlement agreement, the parties agreed that judgment would not be entered dismissing the action until after defendant had paid the settlement amount and any attorney fees awarded by the… Read More

1 2 3 5