During these challenging times, Severson & Werson remains open and in full operation, consistent with the firm’s previously established contingency planning. While many of our attorneys and staff will be working remotely, as a firm, we continue in full operation. We are here to help, as always.


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.

A breach of contract is not "wrongful conduct" sufficient to support a claim for interference with prospective economic relationships.  Here, plaintiff narrowed its claim to interference based on the defendant's breach of a nondisclosure agreement.  Held, the trial court erred in submitting that claim to the jury since it was the court's responsibility to determine whether the alleged conduct was… Read More

The trial court correctly excluded most of a declaration by Synchrony Bank's litigation assistant which attempted to show that plaintiff had agreed to the arbitration provision of the bank's credit card agreement.  Though the declaration attached copies of account statements and different versions of the credit card agreement containing the arbitration clause, it did not attach any record showing the… Read More

This decision affirms a demurrer to numerous claims by sellers against eBay for various charges and other policies it enforces against them under its user agreement.  Although the user agreement is an adhesion contract, the decision holds that it and eBau's policies are published on its website, and though they are lengthy, sellers are under no time pressure to agree. … Read More

Under Civ. Code 3360 and applicable California decisions, a plaintiff who proves that defendant breached a contract is entitled to an award of nominal damages even if the plaintiff is unable to prove actual damages caused by the breach.  (Sweet v. Johnson (1959) 169 Cal.App.2d 630, 632.)  Two 9th Circuit opinions stating that breach of contract claims are not actionable… Read More

Following Dennison v. Rosland Capital LLC (2020) 47 Cal.App.5th 204 and other decisions, this opinion holds that a clear delegation clause, letting the arbitrator decide arbitrability questions was rendered ambiguous and ineffective by a severance clause that referred to an arbitrator or court finding any portion of the arbitration unenforceable.  The arbitration clause in an employment setting was unconscionable as… Read More

Agreeing with decisions from many other districts, this decision holds that an employer cannot compel arbitration of its worker's PAGA claim, as the claim is by the state, not by the worker who signed the arbitration agreement.  Iskanian v. CLS Transportation (2014) 59 Cal.4th 348 remains good law and was not undermined by Epic Systems Corp. v. Lewis (2018) 138… Read More

Plaintiff attorney was hired by defendant as an in-house attorney, but his compensation was dependent, in part, on the outcome of a large bit of litigation in which the defendant was engaged.  This decision holds that plaintiff's agreement was a contingency fee agreement which was unenforceable because not written and signed by both parties as required by B&P Code 6147. … Read More

1 2 3 11