In this action, plaintiff sought a declaration that its use of the trademark "Impossible" in connection with its food products didn't infringe upon defendant's federal trademark of the same word. By a split decision, the 9th Circuit held that California could exercise personal jurisdiction over the defendant, a one-man LLC that for two years operated primarily from San Diego before… Read More
When a plaintiff seeks a preliminary injunction claiming a state statute infringes on plaintiff's constitutional rights, the district court must weigh the plaintiff's probability of success on the merits as well as the existence of irreparable injury and the balance of equities and public interest because the probability of success on the merits heavily influences the evaluation of the other… Read More
Attorneys representing themselves should not be afforded special consideration or the liberal pleading standard allowed other types of pro per litigants, and do not fall into the category of those “proceeding without assistance of counsel" under 9th Circuit rules. Read More
In federal court, FRCivP 41(a)(1)(B) treats the second voluntary dismissal without prejudice of the same claims as a judgment on the merits. However, this decision holds that the federal rule does not give a second dismissal in federal court the force of a judgment on the merits for claim preclusion purposes if the plaintiff files a third suit on the… Read More
The Judicial Council had constitutional authority to adopt Emergency Rule 9 extending statutes of limitation by six months due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Governor Newson's executive order granting the Judicial Council authority to adopt that rule was itself authorized by Gov. Code 8571. Read More
Here, a lender sued on a HELOC loan which provided for monthly payments, gave the lender the discretion to accelerate the loan on default, and provided for any remaining balance to fall due on a specified date. This decision holds that the HELOC called for separate, divisible performances by the borrower--namely, the monthly payments. So that the lender could sue… Read More
A court administering a multi-district litigation proceeding has the power to require common fund benefit assessments--i.e., payments into the MDL proceeding's common benefit fund--from recoveries in non-MDL cases if (1) counsel for claimants in a non-MDL case voluntarily consents to the district court’s authority by signing, or otherwise entering into, a participation agreement requiring contributions in exchange for access to… Read More
The trial court abused its discretion in disqualifying defendant's attorney on the ground the attorney would be defendant's principal witness regarding a decade-old settlement agreement between the parties--one that the attorney had negotiated for defendant. When the client gives fully informed consent, as was true here, the attorney-witness may be disqualified only if the trial court finds prejudice to the… Read More
The collateral source rule cannot be used to confer UCL standing on a plaintiff who has suffered no economic injury from the alleged unfair competition but whose insurer paid more as a result. Here, plaintiff alleged that Genentech sole a drug in too big doses that ended up wasting the expensive drug. Plaintiff conceded he would have paid the same… Read More
Corp. Code 5142 and 5223 provide that a director of a nonprofit corporation may sue to enjoin a breach of the charitable trust and/or to remove another director fraudulent or dishonest acts, gross abuse of authority, or breach of duty. This decision holds that since the two statutes do not use the instituted or maintained" language used in Corp. Code… Read More
A statement of compliance with a demand for production of documents does not need to identify which documents relate to specific items of the demand. Instead, a general statement that the party will produce the requested documents suffices. (CCP 2031.210.) However, under CCP 2031.280(a), as recently amended, when the documents are produced, the producing party must identify to which specific… Read More
The trial court erred in denying defendant's motion for relief from default based on CCP 473(b)'s attorney error provision. The motion for relief was filed within six months after entry of judgment and was accompanied by an attorney declaration of fault. It was in proper form, or at least substantially complied with the form requirements. A motion for relief must… Read More
A 2022 amendment to CCP 340.16(b)(3) revives until 2026 claims for damage resulting from sexual assault that occurred after 2008. This decision holds that the amendment revives any claim for damages arising from a sexual assault, without regard to the legal theory of the claim, and is not limited to tort claims for sexual assault or battery. However, it questions… Read More
Except when a statute granting the right to an attorney fee award itself provides a basis for federal question jurisdiction, a district court lacks jurisdiction to award the defendant attorney fees after dismissing the complaint for lack of Article III standing. Read More
While a district court may convert a motion to dismiss into a summary judgment motion in the parties submit evidence in support of the motion, FRCP 12(d), the district court cannot sua sponte convert a summary judgment motion into a motion to dismiss. Here, defendant didn't move to dismiss for lack of lack of Article III standing but raised the… Read More
Although acknowledging the issue still remains open, it decides the review the trial court's rulings on evidentiary objections on a summary judgment motion under the abuse of discretion standard which it claims is the majority position both before and after Reid v. Google, Inc. (2010) 50 Cal.4th 512 (which highlighted but did not decide the issue). Read More
The parties stipulated to appointing a retired judge as a temporary judge to hear portions of their marital dissolution proceedings. The order appointing the temporary judge stated that the appointment would end on April 1, 2020 except as to any requests for orders that had been submitted before that date but had not yet been resolved. Here, wife submitted a… Read More
The trial court did not abuse its discretion in awarding HSBC its full expert witness fees incurred after rejection of its 998 offer. The expert's testimony was used at trial. His travel and meal expenses were also properly awarded as he came from Georgia to testify. The trial court also did not abuse its discretion in declining to reduce the… Read More
On plaintiff's first appeal, the Court of Appeal reversed a summary judgment for defendant. On remand, the case was tried to a judge who ruled in defendant's favor and plaintiff again appealed. Plaintiff claimed that HSBC violated Penal Code 632 and 632.7 by intentionally recording her confidential personal calls to and from her daughter who, at the time, was working… Read More
Plaintiff sued Disney for common law misappropriation of his story idea in making its animated file Zootopia. This decision affirms a summary judgment for Disney. Plaintiff had no direct evidence of copying. It did not produce evidence sufficient to allow a reasonable inference of copying either. The allegedly copied elements of plaintiff's story idea were not so unique as to… Read More
