Following Lawson v. PPG Architectural Finishes, Inc. (2022) 12 Cal.5th 703, this decision pays close attention to the text of Lab. Code 1102.5, but nevertheless affirms a summary judgment for the employer. First, the decision casts doubt on whether the employee who invokes section 1102.5 must actually believe what she reported was a violation of law so long as there… Read More
Under the FCRA, a furnisher of credit information must make a reasonable investigation if the consumer about whom it furnishes information to a credit reporting bureau properly protests the inaccuracy of the furnisher's information. Furnishers, unlike credit reporting agencies, may be required to investigate the legal as well as factual bases of the information it furnishes. Here, CitiMortgage continued to… Read More
This decision reverses a summary judgment for defendant, finding a triable issue of fact as to whether defendant willfully violated the FCRA's requirement that an employer provide a job applicant a stand alone disclosure of its potential use of credit reports for employment screening. (15 USC 1681b(b)(2)(A).) Wilful for this purpose includes reckless conduct that increases the risk of violation… Read More
Defendant moved for summary judgment, then made a Rule 68 offer of judgment in the amount of $50,000. Less than 14 days later, the court granted the summary judgment motion but didn't immediately enter judgment for defendant. Plaintiff accepted the Rule 68 offer. Held, the acceptance was effective. Under Rule 68, an offer of judgment remains open for 14 days. … Read More
Under the Madrid Protocol implemented in 15 USC 1141 et seq, and under 15 USC 1057, the holder of a trademark registered in a foreign country can obtain registration of the trademark in the United States as well, and obtain the benefit of a constructive use date pegged to the date of the foreign registration or application for US registration. … Read More
Following Charnay v. Cobert (2006) 145 Cal.App.4th 170 and E-Pass Technologies, Inc. v. Moses & Singer, LLP (2010) 189 Cal.App.4th 1140, this decision reverses a summary judgment for the defendant attorneys in this malpractice action based on the allegation that the attorneys failed to warn plaintiff of the disadvantages of bringing the underlying suit in California where the defendant could… Read More
This decision reverses a summary judgment for defendant on plaintiffs Americans with Disabilities Act claim. The summary judgment was granted on the ground that the defendant had fewer than 15 employees, the minimum threshold for application of the ADA. However, the decision holds that there was a triable issue of fact whether the defendant, a Nevada law limited partnership, was… Read More
The trial court did not abuse its discretion in ordering a new trial in this case where the writers for the series Columbo sued the studio that produced those shows. The trial court correctly concluded--only after the jury ruled--that it was for the court to interpret the contract between the parties and that the crucial term "photoplay" included each TV… Read More
The trial court did not abuse its discretion in not denying defendant's summary judgment motion for alleged defects in its separate statement of undisputed facts. Though a trial court may deny a summary judgment motion on that ground, it is not compelled to do so. Here, the alleged defect was stating several facts together in a single "undisputed fact" and… Read More
A summary judgment in favor of defendant in this whistleblower action is reversed because the defendant brought the motion using the McDonnell Douglas test rather than the statutory test under Lab. Code 1102.6, as explicated in Lawson v. PPG Architectural Finishes, Inc. (2022) 12 Cal.5th 703. The decision also holds that the same Lawson test applies under Gov. Code 8547.10,… Read More
A severely retarded resident of a care facility sued it for damages suffered in a sexual assault by a handyman on the facility's premises. The decision holds that the trial court abused its discretion in excluding portions of a police report which the plaintiff relied on in opposition to the facility's summary judgment motion. The police report was excepted from… Read More
Lab. Code 970 prohibits an employer from inducing an employee to relocate and accept employment by means of knowingly false representations about the kind, character, or existence of work or how long it will last. Here, the trial court erred in granting the defendant employer summary judgment on plaintiff's claim under section 970. The at-will employment contract that the plaintiff… Read More
On remand after a prior appeal decided in plaintiff's favor, the district court granted defendant summary judgment finding that defendant was not negligent or willful in including in its credit report mention of plaintiff's criminal charge that was filed more than 7 years before the credit report but was dismissed less than 7 years before the report. This decision affirms… Read More
While a summary adjudication motion must completely dispose of a cause of action, for these purposes "cause of action" is determined in the Pomeroy sense used for res judicata and does not depend on how claims are grouped in the complaint. Thus, where two or more separate and distinct wrongful acts are combined in the same cause of action in… Read More
The trial court erred in granting defendant summary judgment in this suit by a spectator injured by a foul ball during a college baseball game. Despite primary assumption of the risk, the venue has a duty to take reasonable steps to increase safety and minimize the risk of injury to spectators at its baseball games, if it could do so… 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 summary judgment for the employer in a FEHA disability discrimination case. The employer met its McDonnell Douglas burden of proving a nondiscriminatory reason for terminating the plaintiff; namely, her chronic absenteeism and failure to document dispensing of prescription medicine properly. Plaintiff didn't produce any evidence showing the employer's reason was pretextual. Though the employer had misclassified… Read More
This decision reverses a summary judgment in a disability discrimination case under FEHA. Plaintiff presented sufficient evidence to support a prima facie case that he could perform the essential duties of a job with or without accommodation and that he was treated differently from other employees because of his disability. Defendant's showing of a legitimate, nondiscriminatory reason for plaintiff's discharge… Read More
Plaintiff sued the manufacturer of his hip replacement for product liability failure to warn and defective manufacture. This decision affirms summary judgment for the defendant. The failure to warn claim failed because plaintiff's doctor who chose and implanted the hip replacement testified that he kept closely abreast of developments in hip replacement surgery and was aware from reading scientific journals… Read More
In this case, defendant avoided summary judgment by submitting a declaration from a non-party witness which said she knew facts undermining the defendant's going and coming rule defense. After summary judgment was denied on that basis, defendant took the witness' deposition at which she disclaimed any personal knowledge of the facts stated in her declaration which she said she signed… Read More
