California Appellate Tracker

Under San Francisco's rent control ordinance, a “landlord” to evict renters from a unit to make the unit available for a close relative of the landlord.  The ordinance defines "landlord" for this purpose as a natural person.  Here, the property was held in the name of a revocable living trust, not a natural person.  However, the decision holds that the… Read More

To prove a prima facie case under the  Equal Pay Act (29 USC 206(d)), the plaintiff need only show that men were paid more for substantially equal work. In making that comparison it is the overall job, not its individual segmnents that is to be considered. Here, the male professors of psychology were paid more than plaintiff for essentially the… Read More

Probate Code 2640.1 allows a trial court to award attorney fees against the estate of the conservatee and in favor of the person who petitioned for appointment of a conservator if the court appoints a conservator different from the one the petitioner requested.  Here, however, the conservatorship petition was dismissed in a settlement before any conservator was appointed.  In that… Read More

With the exception of one claim, the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying class certification in this wage and hour case.  Plaintiffs claimed that the employer misclassified them as independent contractors.  While the proper classification of the workers was a common question, the trial court did not abuse its discretion in holding that the common issue did… Read More

A doctor's whistleblower retaliation suit was dismissed as premature where the only adverse action taken against the doctor was the medical committee's recommendation that he be disciplined.  The medical committee is a body independent of the hospital.  Until the hospital takes some adverse action against him, the doctor has no accrued claim on which to sue. Read More

Under CCP 708.410, a judgment creditor may obtain a lien on the judgment debtor's right to obtain any money under a judgment, order or decree in any other action in which the judgment debtor is a party.  This decision holds that the lien under sectin 708.410 attaches to money owed the judgment debtor under an order requiring the other party… Read More

Even if interpretation of an administrative regulation does not depend on special expertise and technical knowledge, the agency's interpretation of its own regulation may be entitled to judicial deference because the agency is likely to be familiar with the policy it promotes and sensitive to the practical implications of the competing interpretations.  Here, the university was entitled to deference in… Read More

When an attorney sues a client for attorney fees under an express or implied in fact contract for non-contingent fees that satisfies the requirements of Bus. & Prof. Code 6148, the attorney is entitled to the agreed fees even if they exceed a "reasonable fee" set by the lodestar plus multiplier method--so long as the fees and fee agreement are… Read More

In a construction dispute that originally was over $22,096, the trial court did not abuse its discretion in awarding plaintiff only $90,000 in attorney fees out of the $292,140 requested.  The case was relatively simple, ultimately turning on the contractor's lack of a license and proper insurance.  It involved only money, so it was reasonable to compare fees against recovery… Read More

Before 2011, one person owned both of two adjoining lots.  Tenants on one of the lots used portions of the adjoining lot for access, parking, and garbage removal, and as a garden.  After 2011, different lenders foreclosed on the two lots, separating their ownership.  Plaintiff bought one of the lots and sued to keep the tenants of the other lot… Read More

Threatening or filing suit on a time-barred debt is a misleading and unfair debt collection practice violating 15 USC 1692e and 1692f.  To allege and prove a violation of those sections, the debtor need not allege or prove that the debt collector knew the debt was time-barred.  However, the debt collector may be able to establish an affirmative defense of… Read More

It is not per se a breach of the insurer's duty of good faith for it to fail to accept a reasonable settlement offer within policy limits.  Accordingly, to support a bad faith judgment against the insurer, the jury must find that the insurer acted unreasonably in rejecting (or failing to accept) even a reasonable settlement offer within policy limits. … Read More

A request for nominal damages satisfies the redressability element of standing where a plaintiff’s claim is based on a completed violation of a legal right.  For the purpose of Article III standing, nominal damages provide the necessary redress for a past, completed violation of a legal right. Read More

Ordinarily, a judgment dismissing a case on the ground that the court lacks subject matter jurisdiction over is not a judgment on the merits and does not operate as res judicata.  However, in the unique context of the Federal Tort Claims Act, the court has subject matter jurisdiction only if the complaint plausibly alleges all six elements of an FTCA… Read More

This decision holds that a California governmnetal entity may be liable under PAGA for statutory penalties for violation of Labor Code sections that themselves prescribe penalties for their violation, but not for the default statutory penalties allowed under Lab. Code 2699(f).  That is because Lab. Code 2699(a) allows a private plaintiff to recover any statutory penalty authorized by other Labor… Read More

A proper 998 settlement offer must include a provision that allows the opposing party to accept the offer by signing a statement that the offer is accepted.  A purported 998 offer lacking that provision cannot be used to shift costs if it is not accepted.  (Puerta v. Torres (2011) 195 Cal.App.4th 1267.)  This decision holds that the deficient offer also… Read More

The district court wrongly dismissed this suit under SLUSA because plaintiffs did not allege a claim cognizable under federal securities laws.  They claimed that the defendant broker had switched their accounts from commission-based to fee-based without first performing a suitability analysis to see whether plaintiffs, who were buy-and-hold investors, would benefit from the change in fee structure.  That omission was… Read More

Judgment for defendant is reversed.  Plaintiff alleged that defendant sold plaintiff his membership interest in the LLC, which held a business tax registration certificate for selling marijuana in L.A., but after doing so secretly converted the LLC into a corporation of which he was the sole owner.  The individual plaintiff had standing to sue for loss of her membership interest… Read More

This decision affirms dismissal of a complaint attacking three provisions of PayPal's standard contract.  First, the complaint alleged no breach of contract or the implied covenant by PayPal's placing 21-day holds on payments to plaintiff-sellers' accounts.  The agreement gave PayPal sole discretion in imposing holds.  And PayPal didn't breach the implied covenant of good faith because the complaint disclosed reasonable… Read More

Following Lippitt v. Nationstar Mortgage, LLC (C.D.Cal. 2020) 2020 U.S. Dist. Lexis 122881, this decision holds that Civ. Code 2954.8 does not apply to (or require payment of interest on) hazard insurance proceeds that a lender or loan servicer holds pending the borrower/insured's rebulding or repairing the premises that secures his loan.  Section 2954.8 “applies to common escrows maintained to… Read More