Defendant did not owe a duty of care to plaintiff to protect him from falling from a steeply slanted roof covered with broken, slippery clay roof tiles. The roof's danger was open and obvious. It was not foreseeable that plaintiff, who was neither required nor invited to climb on the roof, would confront that obvious danger. He did so while… Read More
Fraud in factum, in execution or in the inception differs from promissory fraud, which is a false promise. Fraud in execution occurs when the defendant causes the plaintiff to execute a contract that has materially different terms from those on which the parties orally agreed. To allege a claim for fraud in execution, the plaintiff must allege facts showing the… Read More
Summary judgment was properly entered for the defendant in this slip and fall accident on a public sidewalk. The trivial defect doctrine applied to shield the city from liability. The discontinuity between slabs of sidewalk paving over which plaintiff tripped was at most 3/4ths of an inch. There were no other factors adding to the dangerousness of that condition. Plaintiff… Read More
Four individuals protested the Golden Gate racetrack's allegedly improper treatment of race horses by sneaking onto the track, linking their arms by PVC pipes and lying across the track in a manner that prevented the racetrack from holding races. The racetrack owner sued the four individuals for trespass and intentional interference with prospective economic advantage, naming Direct Action as an… Read More
To obtain a right to attach order, the plaintiff must prove it is more likely than not that the plaintiff will obtain a judgment against the defendant on the claim on which it seeks an attachment, and that claim must be either a claim for money based on contract or a claim for elder abuse. (CCP 481.190, 483.010; Welf. &… Read More
Plaintiff, a jewelry store, stated a viable breach of contract action against Sotheby's. Plaintiff owned $4 million in diamonds which it had obtained from Rechnitz as security for his debt. Plaintiff and Rechnitz met with a Sotheby's agent, giving him the diamonds to have appraised for possible auction at Sotheby's. Sotheby's form contract referred to only a single consignor, but… Read More
A person who was not named as a defendant in the prior action, who did not formally intervene as a defendant in that action, and who was not treated as a defendant by the court or the plaintiff, has no standing to sue for malicious prosecution in filing or pursuing the prior action, even if he filed an answer in… Read More
Following Gray v. Dignity Health (2021) 70 Cal.App.5th 225, this decision holds that a hospital does not violate the CLRA if it discloses its emergency room evaluation and management services fee in its on-line chargemaster list of fees. No additional signage or disclosure of the EMS fee is required. Any requirement of the sort would impair the Legislature's and Congress'… Read More
This decision reverses a punitive damage award against a supplier of talc to the manufacturer of Old Spice talcum powder. Defendant did not contest the jury's verdicts finding that plaintiff contracted mesothelioma from the asbestos in the talcum powder and that defendant was negligent in failing to detect and warn consumers about its presence in the product. However, there was… Read More
A hospital may be held vicariously liable for a doctor's negligent treatment of a patient at the hospital if the doctor is a hospital employee or the hospital's ostensible agent. Mejia v. Community Hospital of San Bernardino (2002) 99 Cal.App.4th 1448; Whitlow v. Rideout Memorial Hospital (2015) 237 Cal.App.4th 631. Here, the trial court correctly granted the hospital summary judgment… Read More
The trial court correctly granted defendant summary judgment in this slip-and-fall injury suit in an exercise facility's sauna room. The release of claims in the fitness center's membership agreement absolved the fitness center of liability for ordinary negligence. Plaintiff failed to submit evidence creating a triable issue of fact as to gross negligence. She claimed to have fallen because the… Read More
Plaintiff sued for defamation, alleging that defendants falsely told several reporters that plaintiff had provided explicit nude photographs of Bezos to the National Enquirer as part of a conspiracy to damage Bezos. On defendants' Anti-SLAPP motion, plaintiff's only evidence was his declaration stating that several news reporters had told him that Bezos told them plaintiff had given the photos to… Read More
The trial court erred in granting defendant school district summary judgment. Plaintiff, a student at the district's high school was stabbed by third person when following after school sports practice, she briefly visited a Starbucks and then returned to the high school to recover her books from her school locker. The brief diversion to Starbucks did not interrupt the school's… Read More
Plaintiffs' decedent suffered a massive heart embolism while in the bathroom of a Southwest Airlines plane flying from Oakland to Orange County. When the airplane's flight attendants became aware something was wrong, they wrongly diagnosed the problem as a terrorist threat. The pilot contacted the Orange County Sheriff's office, which sent officers to the plane on arrival and removed all… Read More
Plaintiffs sued claiming they had been sexually molested while minors by a Roman Catholic priest. They sought to hold the Archdiocese vicariously liable for ratifying the molestation and directly liable for its own negligence in failing to supervise the priest. The trial court correctly denied the Archdiocese's Anti-SLAPP motion. The allegations about the Bishop's supporting the priest's defense of another… Read More
Plaintiffs failed to allege a viable claim of trespass to chattels against defendants whom they alleged accessed and copied, without authority, computer files containing private legal and medical information about them and other workers compensation plaintiffs. Under Intel Corp. v. Hamidi (2003) 30 Cal.4th 1342, a trespass to chattels claim cannot be stated for computer hacking (either sending or copying… Read More
Generally, a landlord does not owe a duty of care with respect to open and obvious dangers on the property. There is an exception, however, when it is foreseeable that, because of necessity or other circumstances, a person may choose to encounter the condition. Here, the exception applied because the obviously dangerous stairway, with uneven risers and no handrail, led… Read More
Defendant admitted negligence in an auto accident case. But the trial court correctly denied plaintiff's motion for a directed verdict on causation. Defendant's expert said only that the accident caused additional injury "if the plaintiff's testimony is believed." The jury could and did disbelieve plaintiff. Plaintiff could not complain on appeal about the wording of jury instructions since he invited… Read More
Florida does not violate the Medicare Act by asserting a lien for 37.5% of a Medicare recipient's settlement of his claim against a third party tortfeasor for injuries treated with Medicare benefits. Under Florida law, there is a presumption that 37.5% of any personal injury settlement is paid for past and future medical expenses unless rebutted by clear and convincing… Read More
Malefactors unrelated to Uber obtained Uber stickers from its website and placed them on their cars. Then they picked up women who thought the men were Uber drivers. This decision holds that Uber is not liable for the fake drivers' rape of the women. Uber didn't have a special relationship with the women that imposed any duty on it to… Read More
