California Appellate Tracker

Under Gov. Code section 12974, DFEH can seek a preliminary injunction from a court to halt what it believes is a discriminatory act or practice pending completion of DFEH's administrative proceedings.  Here, DFEH sought, and the trial court denied, such an injunction.  The DFEH continued its administrative proceedings thereafter until the defendants in that proceeding got the trial court to… Read More

Government Code section 12974 provides for one-way attorney fee awards in favor of the DFEH, if successful in discrimination suits it brings.  That statute conflicts with CCP 1021.5 to the extent that 1021.5 would permit a successful defendant to obtain a fee award against the DFEH in a discrimination suit.  Since section 12974 is the more specific statute, it prevails… Read More

An unincorporated association can sue and be sued, and so can be a "party" entitled to a private attorney general fee award if successful.  When an unincorporated association represents its members in an election contest, it must show that its members live in the area affected by the outcome of the election, its members would suffer injury from an adverse… Read More

Notwithstanding  United States v. Paramount Pictures (1948) 334 U.S. 131, which applied a per se test to circuit-dealing contracts in movie theaters, this decision holds that the rule of reason test applies to a non-monopoly claim of circuit-dealing contracts under the Cartwright Act.  Paramount Pictures dealt with a unique market structure which has since vanished from the motion picture industry. … Read More

Moritz produced a series of Fast and Furious films for Universal.  In connection with those films, Moritz entered into contracts with Universal which contained arbitration clauses requiring arbitration of disputes arising out of or related to those agreements.  Some of the early films' arbitration clauses delegated arbitrability issues to the arbitrator by choosing JAMS rules.  But later ones did not. … Read More

This decision dismisses an appeal as untimely.  The appealed orders were issued before the COVID-19 court closures.  The trial court's emergency rules treated dates during the closure as holidays, so under CCP 12a, the notice of appeal was due the next day which was not a holiday, namely, June 1, when the trial court reopened.  The Court of Appeal's emergency… Read More

When the complaint does not allege facts disclosing the amount in controversy, a defendant removing the case under CAFA need only allege facts that plausibly show that the case satisfies CAFA's jurisdictional requirements, including the amount in controversy.  The notice of removal need not cite evidence supporting the allegations of those jurisdictional facts.  The plaintiff can challenge the notice of… Read More

The district court made a clear error as a matter of law in holding that an Uber driver was not a worker engaged in interstate commerce and thus exempt from the FAA.  Though interstate transportion of people as well as goods may constitute interstate commerce for FAA purposes, the focus under the FAA is on the employer's business and whether… Read More

A signed, filed-endorsed minute order granting an Anti-SLAPP motion as to the entire complaint was a final appealable order.  Plaintiff had 60 days from the date the clerk mailed a copy of the order in which to appeal.  The appeal time was not extended when the trial court thereafter needlessly entered a one-page formal order granting the motion.  Plaintiff's motion… Read More

Under Lab. Code 3366 civilian who assists any peace officer in active law enforcement service at the request of the peace officer's request is deemed to be a public employee as a matter of law and is entitled to workers compensation for any injury sustained while providing that assistance.  However, since workers compensation is available, the person assisting the police… Read More

Following Woods v. Fox Broadcasting Sub. Inc. (2005) 129 Cal.App.4th 344 and Asahi Kasei Pharma Corp. v. Actelion, Ltd. (2013) 222 Cal.App.4th 945, not PM Group, Inc. v. Stewart (2007) 154 Cal.App.4th 55, this decision holds that a claim for intentional interference with (or inducing breach of) contract may be stated against any defendant that was not a party to… Read More

The Equal Access to Justice Act (28 U.S.C. § 2412(d)) does not authorize a fee award against the bankruptcy court that, sua sponte, refused to confirm movan't Chapter 13 plan because it did not state a definite end date for performance of the plan.  The EAJA does not treat courts as part of the "United States" for purposes of a… Read More

Even in a case in which the court applies the de novo standard of review to a petition for administrative mandamus, the court reviews for abuse of discretion the administrative agency's refusal to consider new evidence presented after the ALJ's decision.  Here, the court reverses, finding an abuse of discretion in the Appeals Board's refusal to consider a belated declaration… Read More

This decision upholds a Workplace Violence Prevention injunction issued against a perennial attendant at LA City Council meetings who threatened a city attorney who advised the Council at those meetings. The defendant made threats against the attorney.  He put swastikas and KKK symbols on public comment cards at the Council meetings, indicated he thought the attorney was Jewish, and repeatedly… Read More

A party normally has 100 days from service of an arbitration award in which to file a petition or motion seeking to vacate the award.  However, if the other party files and serves a petition to confirm the award less than 90 days after service of the award, the time to respond and file any cross petition or motion to… Read More

When a party to an arbitration becomes aware of facts showing the arbitrator is biased, the party must give notice of the arbitrator's disqualification before a hearing of any contested issue of fact relating to the merits of the claim or after any ruling by the arbitrator regarding any contested matter.  CC\P 1281.91(c).  Here, the arbitrator revealed that the father… Read More

In this unlawful detainer action, with a breach of warranty of habitability cross-complaint, the trial court threatened to send the matter to judicial arbitration, after which the parties agreed to arbitration.  Though the parties' agreement wasn't crystal clear on the point, this decision holds that they had agreed to contractual arbitration governed by CCP 1280 et seq., ending in a… Read More

CCSF wrongly terminated Morgado's employment as a police officer.  While he was no longer working for CCSF, Morgado was engaged as a broker, earning $181,000 in gross income.  This decision holds that Morgado's earnings as a broker must be offset agaisnt the damages he is awarded against CCSF whether for front or back pay.  Morgado is entitled only to be… Read More

Defendant sold goods through its Internet website.  It had no physical presence in California but 8 to 10 per cent of its sales were to California residents. That was sufficient availment of the benefits and protections of California law to satisfy due process, even though the defendant did not target California residents any more than residents of other states. Making… Read More

Bus. & Prof. Code 7031(b) allows any person who uses an unlicensed contractor to bring an action for disgorgement of all compensation paid the contractor for construction work.  This decision holds that a claim under this statute is a suit for a statutory penalty which must be brought within a year of completion of the unlicensed contractor's work under CCP… Read More