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.

Though not limited by US Const. Art. III case or controversy standing requirements, California court apply prudential standing requirements.  Absent a statutory grant of standing to represent the general public, a plaintiff must generally show that he has a beneficial interest in the claim he pursues.  A statute like FCRA that allows for statutory damages that are intended to compensate… Read More

Patients sued medical group after the group suffered a data breach that allowed hackers access to personal indentifying information concerning patients, including SSNs and medical histories.  This decision holds that the patients have UCL standing to sue.  Under their "benefit of the bargain" theory, the patients suffered a loss of money by purchasing the medical group's services which (a) weren't… Read More

A defaulted defendant (or in this case, one against whom terminating discovery sanctions had been entered) may, nevertheless, move for a new trial on the ground that the court made an “error in law” in calculating damages.  Even a defaulting defendant may appeal the resulting default judgment on the grounds that the damages award (1) “is so disproportionate to the… Read More

On remand after reversal of an order dismissing the complaint (Sicre De Fontbrune v. Wolfsy (9th Cir. 2016) 838 F.3d 992), this decision reverses a summary judgment in defendant's favor refusing to enforce a French judgment for "astreinte" damages for using photos of Picasso paintings infringing plaintiff's copyright in the photos.  The French judgment that plaintiff sought to enforce was… Read More

Plaintiff, a Russian citizen residing in Russia, obtained an arbitration award against defendant, a Russian citizen residing in California.  Plaintiff domesticated the arbitration award, securing a judgment against defendant in a federal district court in California so that plaintiff could execute on defendant's California assets.  Thereafter, defendant engaged in a series of complex domestic and foreign efforts to shelter his… Read More

CCP 902 allows an appeal only by a party "aggrieved" by the appealed order or judgment.  Here, the watermaster appointed by the court to administer its judgment allocating water rights among claimants to the same river was not aggrieved and therefore lacked standing to appeal from a trial court order which interpreted the 60-year-old judgment allocating water rights among the… Read More

Plaintiff was the executrix as well as a beneficiary of her parents' estate. She claimed that a relative and co-beneficiary conspired with two other defendants to fraudulently induce her, as executrix, to take a large loan at usurious rates secured by the parents' house, the estate's principal asset, after which the co-beneficiary misappropriated most of the loan funds.  This decision… Read More

Oakland lacked standing to bring a price-fixing antitrust claim against Oakland Raiders and other NFL teams arising out of the Raiders' move to Las Vegas.  A finding of antitrust standing requires a balancing of the nature of the plaintiff’s alleged injury, the directness of the injury, the speculative measure of the harm, the risk of duplicative recovery, and the complexity… Read More

This decision dismisses as moot a suit that a taxpayer brought seeking to enjoin a program for granting emergency aid to undocumented aliens in California during the COVID pandemic.  The program proceeded while the case was pending.  All the program's money was spent.  There is no way to get the money back and no realistic threat that the program will… Read More

To have standing to move to disqualify another party's attorney, the movant must generally be a present or former client of the challenged attorney, or at least a person who shared confidential information with that attorney in the course of a confidential or fiduciary relationship.  Otherwise, the movant is generally not affected by any breach of the attorney's duties of… Read More

A director of a nonprofit public benefit corporation who brings an action on behalf of that corporation loses standing to pursue its claims if the director is not reelected to the office of director at any point during the litigation.  Here, plaintiff was not re-elected, lost standing, and his suit was properly dismissed. Read More

Each class member must establish Article III standing in order to recover relief in a case in federal court.  Here, TransUnion included incorrect OFAC terrorist information in its credit files on 8,000 class members but issued credit reports to third parties with the incorrect OFAC information only as to 1,600 of the class members.  This decision holds that only the… Read More

A shareholder in a California-based corporation has Article III standing to sue the California Secretary of State to seek to enjoin SB 826 (2018) which enacted Corp. Code  301.3, 2115.5, requiring covered corporations to have at least one female director by 2019 and up to three female directors by 2021.  Even though the statute is directed against corporations, not their… Read More

Two individuals and a number of states lack standing to challenge the minimum essential coverage provision of Obamacare because Congress eliminated the penalty for non-compliance with the statutory requirement of minimum coverage.  As there was no longer any governmental compulsion to obtain the coverage, the individual plaintiffs could not show that their supposed injury from having paid for coverage was… Read More

Under CCP 526a, as amended in 2018, to have standing to bring a taxpayer suit, the plaintiff must show that it or one of its members (a) resided within the jurisdiction of the governmental entity at suit and (b) within a year before the challenged governmental action paid a tax that funds that entity which is a property tax, an… Read More

For an association to have standing to sue for its members, it must show that (a) its members would otherwise have standing to sue in their own right; (b) the interests it seeks to protect are germane to the organization's purpose; and (c) neither the claim asserted nor the relief requested requires the participation of individual members in the lawsuit. … Read More

1 2 3