Skip to Content (Press Enter)

Skip to Nav (Press Enter)

Civil Procedure

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.

Trial court erred in denying appellant’s motion for a settled statement of unrecorded oral proceedings, but appellant failed to properly preserve that issue for appeal, so judgment had to be affirmed for lack of an adequate record to review.  Read More

A public entity has four years to sue to invalidate its own contract under Gov. Code 1090 because of a board member approving the contract was on the contractor’s payroll, not the mere 60 days allowed a private party to sue to invalidate the public entity’s contracts.  Read More

When, on a summary judgment motion in a case removed from state court, a federal court determines it lacks subject matter jurisdiction because the plaintiff lacks Article III standing, the federal court should remand the case to state court, not dismiss it.  Read More

Ordinarily, when an appeal is mooted, the appellate court simply dismisses the appeal, but it can also vacate judgment and remand to allow the trial court to dismiss the case if legislative or administrative action has mooted the entire case; here, however, the appellant itself mooted its own appeal so it should not be allowed escape the consequences of a… Read More

The Financial Institutions Reform, Recovery, and Enforcement Act (“FIRREA”) provides an extension on the statutes of limitations for contract and tort claims in actions brought by the National Credit Union Administration Board, which supersedes other limitations periods set by state or federal statute.  Read More

Trial court erred in allowing suspended (and eventually dissolved) corporation relief from default judgment, since its agent for service of process was served, thus giving it actual knowledge of the suit.  Read More

A homeowners association’s post-foreclosure quiet title action stated a viable claim against the former owner who might challenge the foreclosure; hence, the former owner was not fraudulently joined and the federal courts lacked diversity jurisdiction.  Read More

A 998 offer is invalid and will not shift costs if it requires a release of claims beyond those pertaining to the action in which the 998 offer is made, such as, here, where the 998 offer required plaintiff to release all claims he might have against the defendant, whether or not they were connected with the incident giving rise… Read More

Plaintiff injured in an auto accident by defendant driving an ambulance was subject to the two-year limitations period for personal injury claims arising from general negligence—as opposed to the one-year period that applies to medical malpractice claims—since the act of driving the ambulance does not involve the practice of medicine.  Read More

Plaintiff’s one-year limitations period for bringing suit after the California Department of Fair Employment & Housing issued a right-to-sue letter should be equitably tolled for a year beyond the EEOC’s issuance of its own right-to-sue  letter, because plaintiff reasonably relied on the DFEH letter’s incorrect statement that the limitations period would be tolled while EEOC investigated the claim.  Read More

In this wage and hour dispute, defendant was not entitled to a writ of mandate to overturn a district court scheduling order setting trial on the issue of whether plaintiff’s contracts were employment agreements in interstate commerce and thus exempt from the Federal Arbitration Act, since defendant has an adequate remedy on appeal from any order denying its motion to… Read More

Plaintiff’s unsuccessful federal 1983 suit against the Franchise Tax Board for publishing plaintiff’s name as one of the top 500 tax debtors barred later state law suit against the FTB for that same act.  Read More

In determining whether an action or tactic is frivolous for purposes of a sanctions award under CCP 128.5, the court should apply an objective standard, judging the merits of the action or tactic from a reasonable person's perspective; and that a complaint withstood demurrer does not prove it was not frivolous, since whether a claim is meritless must be evaluated… Read More

Defendant’s concurrent filing of an Anti-SLAPP motion with his motion to quash service of summons for lack of personal jurisdiction does not constitute a general appearance waiving the jurisdictional argument.  Read More

A governmental entity that defended its employee under a proper reservation of rights need not indemnify the employee for punitive damages awarded against him.  Read More

A prisoner serving a life sentence with possibility of parole is entitled to a two-year tolling of the statute of limitations on his medical malpractice claims arising out of treatment in a prison hospital.  Read More

An order granting an Anti-SLAPP motion as to two of three defendants is not appealable under federal procedural law which governs a diversity case pending in federal court—even though such an order would be appealable under California law Read More

Order vacating consent judgment based on defendants’ substantial compliance is reversed because the record was insufficient to establish defendants’ compliance with all of terms of the judgment entered in favor of plaintiff, a prisoner who followed the Wiccan religion.  Read More

Service of summons and complaint on defendant was considered adequate when his father accepted substituted service at home, defendant could not establish that he had a permanent residence elsewhere, and his father gave him actual notice of the suit within three days of the substituted service.  Read More

1 54 55 56 57 58