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.

California Appellate Tracker

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.

Prob. Code 21620 and 21622 deal differently with pretermitted heirs born after and those born before the testator's death.  Section 21620 establishes a presumption that the heirs born after the testator's death were omitted unintentionally and thus are entitled to inherit, unless an opposing party proves otherwise.  Under 21622, however, the burden is on the heirs born before the testator's… Read More

After having class certification denied and losing a partial summary judgment motion, plaintiff entered into a stipulation with defendant for a voluntary dismissal so he could appeal.  However, the stipulation reserved his right to appeal only the summary judgment and class certification rulings, not an earlier dismissal of a claim on a motion to dismiss.  This decision holds that by… Read More

The district court did not abuse its discretion in holding the plaintiff to the local rule requiring a class certification motion to be filed within 90 days of filing the complaint, particularly, as it then gave the plaintiff another 30 days to develop evidence and the right to file a supplemental brief.  Plaintiff couldn't show he was kept from discovery… Read More

A bankrupt may assume an existing lease of personal property (such as a car) under 11 USC 365(p).  This decision holds that the debtor may assume the lease, and the creditor may enforce it after the debtor is discharged without also complying with the rrequirements for reaffirming a debt under 11 USC 524(c). Read More

B&P Code 16600 bans any agreement that restrains anyone from engaging in a lawful business or trade.  While the Court has interpreted the section as strictly forbidding any restraint in the employment context, a different rule--the rule of reason--applies to contracts restraining trade outside the employment context. Read More

To prevail on a claim for tortiously inducing breach of an at-will contract (outside the context of employment contracts), the plaintiff must plead and prove that the defendant engaged in independently wrongful conduct to induce breach of the contract.  An at-will contract is similar to a prospective economic advantage.  The plaintiff has no right to compel performance in the future. … Read More

In evaluating the sufficiency of the evidence in support of a finding, an appellate court must make an appropriate adjustment to its analysis when the clear and convincing standard of proof applied before the trial court. In general, the court must determine whether the record, viewed as a whole, contains substantial evidence from which a reasonable trier of fact could… Read More

Class Actions, CAFA, Relationship to Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act Jurisdictional Requirements, 2, 7 CAFA does not impliedly repeal the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act's limitations on federal court jurisdiction.  For a federal court to have jurisdiction of a class action claim under the MMWA, there must be at least 100 named plaintiffs.  15 USC 2310(d)(3).  An MMWA class action claim brought by fewer… Read More

Plaintiffs pled a viable claim for false advertising under the UCL by the defendant manufacturers of pet food labeled "prescription" pet food.  Under the reasonable consumer test, use of the word "prescription" was misleading in suggesting that the pet food contrained medicine or drugs.  The fact that defendants sold their products, at least initially, only through vets did not make… Read More

When Judd, an actress, refused Harvey Weinstein's sexual advances, he bad-mouthed her to the producers of Lord of the Rings, and as a result, she was not hired for that blockbuster film.  Judd stated a viable claim against Weinstein for sexual harassment in violation of Civ. Code 51.9.  The section applies when the parties have one of several relationships specified… Read More

1 2 3 150