Under CCP 2023.010 and 2023.030, providing evasive or false discovery responses is a discovery abuse for which the court must grant the opposing party monetary sanctions unless it finds there was substantial justification for the discovery abuse or awarding sanctions would be unjust. Here, the trial court found substantial abuse of discovery in providing false responses, but erroneously failed to… Read More
A party seeking to invoke federal admiralty jurisdiction over a tort claim must satisfy both a location test and a connection test. To satisfy the location test, the tort must occur on navigable waters, which means waters that by themselves or through connection with others form a continued highway over which commerce with other states or countries may be carried… Read More
Under Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.516, in a coordinated proceeding, a 170.6 challenge to the coordination trial judge must be filed within 20 days after that judge has been assigned to the coordinated cases. The rule also specifies that all plaintiffs in all the coordinated cases are deemed "one side" and all defendants another "side" for purposes of the… Read More
In cases seeking a writ of mandate, where the question is one of public right and the object of the mandamus is to procure the enforcement of a public duty, the [petitioner] need not show that he has any legal or special interest in the result, since it is sufficient that he is interested as a citizen in having the… Read More
To amend a judgment to name an alter ego, the plaintiff must show that the alter ego controled the litigation and were virtually represented in that proceeding, that there is a unity of interest and ownership such that the separate personalities of entities and owners no longer exists, and that an inequitable result would result if the entity's separate existence… Read More
An order amending judgment to name an alter ego is reviewed for abuse of discretion. Relentless Air Racing, LLC v. Airborne Turbine Ltd. Partnership (2013) 222 Cal.App.4th 811, 815. Read More
The Federal Aviation Administration Authorization Act does not preempt California's ABC test for distinguishing between independent contractors and employees, and so that test as adopted in Dynamex Operations West, Inc. v. Superior Court (2018) 4 Cal.5th 903 and codified in Lab. Code 2775 and 2776 governs in determining whether a federally licensed interstate motor carrier has correctly classified its truck… Read More
Under the rule announced in Muktarian v. Barmby (1965) 63 Cal.2d 558, the statute of limitations does not start to run on a quiet title action so long as the plaintiff remains in possession of the premises, even if plaintiff is aware of conflicting claims against the property, so long as the conflicting claims are not pressed against him. In … Read More
A trial court has discretion to consider new evidence in reply papers supporting a summary judgment motion as long as the opposing party has notice and an opportunity to respond. Evidence which is used to fill gaps in the original evidence created by the opposition is particularly appropriate to consider in a reply. Read More
To preserve its affirmative defenses, a defendant need not file a new answer to an amended complaint that does not change the cause of action to which those defenses pertain. When an amended complaint does not add new parties, new claims, or significant new factual allegations, the answer to the previously filed complaint suffices. Read More
Disagreeing with Plancich v. United Parcel Service, Inc. (2011) 198 Cal.App.4th 308, this decision holds that Labor Code 218.5 and 1194 prescribe one-way fee and cost awards in employee suits for minimum wage and overtime pay, precluding the application of CCP 1032 and CCP 998, which only changes the normal prevailing party determination under CCP 1032. An employer may recover… Read More
In this suit for unpaid wages, plaintiff successfully opposed defendant's motion to transfer the case to the court's limited jurisdiction division, but then failed to recover damages exceeding the limited jurisdiction's maximum. CCP 1033 provides that when this occurs,, the court may deny the plaintiff costs, including attorney fees. Without deciding whether the fee-shifting provisions of various Labor Code sections… Read More
In reaction to San Diegans for Open Government v. City of San Diego (2016) 247 Cal.App.4th 1306, the Legisalture amended CCP 128.5 to require in subdivision (f) that the court first find a motion, complaint or other filing to be frvolous under subdivision (a) and then not award sanctions until after a 21-day safe harbor as under CCP 128.7. This… Read More
This decision holds that CCP 351, which tolls the statute of limitations while the defendant is absent from the state, is unconstiturional as violative of the dorman Commerce Clause insofar as it tolls the statute of limitations on claims against a defendant who was a California resident when the claim accrued, but later moved permanently out of state. Here, plaintiff… Read More
This decision reverses the trial court's denial of defendant's motion to set aside a default judgment and the underlying default under CCP 473.5 and for extrinsic mistake or fraud. Plaintiff lent to defendant's CEO, who without authority pledged defendant's assets as collateral for the loan, which he invested in a Ghanaian scam. Plaintiff filed suit against the CEO and defendant,… Read More
The federal Wiretap Act provides a civil cause of action to any person whose wire, oral, or electronic communication is intercepted, disclosed, or intentionally used in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 2510–2523. (18 U.S.C. § 2520(a).) Under § 2520(e), the action must be brought no later than two years after the date upon which the claimant first has a reasonable… Read More
When the parties agree to a general reference under CCP 638, unless their agreement provides otherwise, the trial court must enter judgment in accordance with the referee's decision once it is filed with the court. However, following entry of judgment, the court may review the referee's legal conclusions on a party's motion for new trial or to vacate the judgment. … Read More
The district court correctly abstained on Younger v. Harris grounds and dismissed this suit which sought to enjoin the Hawaii Attorney General from proceeding with a state court suit under Hawaii's UDAP statute for deceptively marketing Plavix by concealing the fact that Asians and Pacific Islanders have a genetic modification that impairs the drug's function. The state court suit was… Read More
State Farm's 998 offer was valid and enforceable to shift costs in this case. The signature block contained a space for signature by the attorney for the HOA, which was sufficient to identify the party in the signature line for acceptance. Also, the 998 offer's requirement of signature on a settlement agreement releasing all claims " arising from, relating or… Read More
Three principles govern the award of monetary sanctions for discovery abuse. First, the court must award monetary sanctions against the loser of a discovery motion unless it finds that either the loser acted with substantial justification or imposition of sanctions would be unjust under the circumstances. Second, the monetary sanctions may only be imposed based on attorney fees and costs… Read More
