Skip to Content (Press Enter)

Skip to Nav (Press Enter)

Effective, Experienced, Exceptional.

Firm Profile

Collateral Estoppel

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.

JPV I L.P. v. Koetting, No. A163491, 2023 Cal. App. LEXIS 89 (Ct. App. Feb. 7, 2023)

Vandenberg v. Superior Court (1999) 21 Cal.4th 815 nixes only nonmutual collateral estoppel from an arbitration award.  Here, the same parties to the arbitration award, or individuals in privity with them, raised the same issues that the arbitrator had adjudicated, in court in connection with a post-confirmation (and post appeal from the confirmation) motion to amend the judgment to add… Read More

Tukes v. Richard, Nos. B307242, B308337, B312086, 2022 Cal. App. LEXIS 604 (Ct. App. July 12, 2022)

Recognizing a divergence of opinions on this point, this decision follows Rice v. Crow (2000) 81 Cal.App.4th 725 and Le Parc Community Assn. v. Workers’ Comp. Appeals Bd. (2003) 110 Cal.App.4th 1161 in holding that the bare voluntary pre-trial dismissal of a lawsuit (pursant to settlement with less than all defendants) with prejudice does not result in the “actual litigation”… Read More

Bullock v. City of Antioch, No. A161029, 2022 Cal. App. LEXIS 394 (Ct. App. May 6, 2022)

One union representing some of Antioch's employees brought an administrative grievance making the same claim as the retired employee plaintiff brought in this later suit--that the City was stinting them on contributions for their benefit to CalPers,  This decision holds that the due process limits on collateral estoppel keep it from operating to bar the current suit based on the… Read More

Struiksma v. Ocwen Loan Servicing, No. G059223, 2021 Cal. App. LEXIS 574 (Ct. App. July 14, 2021

The res judicata/collateral estoppel effect of a post-foreclosure unlawful detainer judgment extends only to proper conduct of the trustee's sale, not to claims of earlier wrongs committed by the lender that purportedly led eventually to the foreclosure.  Thus, here, the unlawful detainer judgment against the borrowers did not preclude them from later suing on a claim that the lender had… Read More

Shuler v. City of Los Angeles (2021)

Plaintiff sued City in federal court, alleging both federal and state law claims arising from her arrest and strip search by City police officers.  The federal jury rendered a verdict in the City's favor on the federal law claims.  The federal court dismissed the state law negligence claims without prejudice.  Plaintiff refiled those claims in state court.  Following Hernandez v.… Read More