Skip to Content (Press Enter)

Skip to Nav (Press Enter)

Torts

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.

This decision holds that a complaint alleging a false implied certification violation of the California False Claims Act must be pleaded with particularity.  But, it also holds that the plaintiff satisfied that standard in this case in which plaintiff claimed that remarketing agents had breached their contracts with local agencies in setting the interest rates on local agencies' variable rate… Read More

Under California's False Claims Act, there is a public disclosure bar to suit if the information on which the suit is based was publicly disclosed in a criminal, civil, or administrative hearing, in a report, hearing, audit or investigation by the Legislature, or in news media.  (Gov. Code 12652(d)(3)(A).)  This decision holds that interest rates on government bonds automatically reported… Read More

Reversing Gonzalez v. Google LLC (9th Cir. 2021) 2 F.4th 871, the Supreme Court holds that the Justice Against Sponsors of International Terrorism Act of 2016 (JASTA; 18 USC 2333) which amended the ATA to include secondary civil liability for aiding and abetting, or conspiring to commit, acts of international terrorism requires proof of knowing assistance in criminal activity according… Read More

This decision extensively analyzes the trivial defect doctrine as applied to sidewalk discontinuities.  It rejects the defendant city's argument that the 1-3/4" discontinuity in this case was trivial as a matter of law.  A defect of that height generally is left to the jury to evaluate.  Also, the court's holistic consideration of other surrounding circumstances led it to reject the… Read More

Plaintiff wanted to give her cat "a good death."  She alleged an actionable fraud claim against the defendant vet for promising to give the cat a painless death, thereby getting plaintiff to agree to an intracardiac injection.  Plaintiff suffered damage from her reliance on that representation when her cat suffered a long and painful death instead.  Plaintiff also stated a… Read More

Claiming plaintiffs assaulted him, defendant filed a police report which led to plaintiffs' arrest.  However, the DA declined to file charges against plaintiffs and they were released without a criminal prosecution ever being commenced against them.  Following Van Audenhove v. Perry (2017) 11 Cal.App.5th 915, this decision holds that mere arrest without the filing of criminal charges is insufficient to… Read More

Plaintiff mother sued for negligent infliction of emotional distress.  She was on the telephone with her daughter while the daughter drove a car at an intersection where her vision of on-coming traffic was obscured by defendants' negligent maintenance of vegetation on adjoining property.  That mother heard the crash on the phone was insufficient in itself to allow her to sue. … Read More

Gov. Code 855.4 grants public entities and employees immunity from liability for injuries caused by discretionary decisions about protecting public health.  This decision follows s Wright v. City of Los Angeles (2001) 93 Cal.App.4th 683 and City of Los Angeles v. Superior Court (2021) 62 Cal.App.5th 129 in holding that this provision is not governed by the same requirements as… Read More

This decision affirms a summary judgment on plaintiff's antitrust claim against a competing fast fashion retailer which had refused to buy from clothing vendors unless they quit selling to plaintiff.  Plaintiff failed to present evidence of a horizontal agreement among the clothing vendors to not sell to plaintiff.  A vertical agreement between defendant and each vendor was not a per… Read More

Unclean hands may be raised as a defense to a malicious prosecution action.  Here, the jury voted in favor of the defense based on evidence that the plaintiff had lied at her deposition in the underlying action, leading the defendant not to amend its cross-complaint after plaintiff's demurrer to it was sustianed with leave to amend.   Whether the particular misconduct… Read More

Following Canister v. Emergency Ambulance Service, Inc. (2008) 160 Cal.App.4th  388, this decision holds that MICRA's one-year from discovery limitations period applies to a claim that plaintiff was injured by an automobile accident caused by the EMT's negligent driving of the ambulance taking plaintiff to a hospital.  The negligence occurred in the rendering of services for which a provider is… Read More

Following Roldan v. Callahan & Blaine (2013) 219 Cal.App.4th 87, this decision affirms an order denying arbitration after the defendant refused to pay all arbitration costs.  Substantial evidence supported the trial court's finding that Daniel Hang was indigent when he died while in defendant's care.  His son brought suit for elder abuse and negligent hiring and supervision as Hang's successor-in-interest. … Read More

Under the state's False Claims Act and Insurance Frauds Prevention Act, a qui tam plaintiff must file the complaint under seal and send it to the Attorney General or Insuance Commissioner and district attorney.  Only after those entities decide not to intervene and take over prosecution of the action may the plaintiff serve the defendant(s) and proceed to litigate the… Read More

1 2 3 4 5 24