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.

The Communications Decency Act does not shield an internet website owner from liability for failure to warn users about dangers posed by sexual predators using the site to target vulnerable women for abuse. Read More

Suppliers who were third party beneficiaries of phone aggregator’s contract with consumer plaintiff could enforce that contract’s arbitration clause against plaintiff.  Read More

A child molester’s “grooming” presents to the molested minor did not trigger application of Insurance Code section 11583 which tolls the statute of limitations on partial payment of compensation for injury given without notice of applicable limitations periods.  Read More

An arbitration award cannot be vacated by the courts due to factual errors or for bias when the arbitrator had previously represented both sides in similar disputes.  Read More

Under CCP 1032(a), a prevailing party is entitled to a cost award even if it is united in interest with co-parties that did not prevail, but the trial court has discretion in awarding only those jointly incurred costs which were reasonably necessary to the prevailing party’s case.  Read More

A discriminatory constructive discharge from employment claim accrues on the employee’s resignation, not on the earlier date of the employer’s last discriminatory act.  Read More

Asbestos supplier could not escape strict product liability for worker’s mesothelioma based on the sophisticated user defense as substantial evidence supported the jury’s weighing of the gravity of harm posed by the asbestos, the likelihood the sophisticated user would give required warnings and the feasibility of the supplier’s doing so. Read More

Defendant was unable to challenge domestic violence protective order on the ground that he had not consented to have a court commissioner decide the issue, because he impliedly consented to have the commissioner decide the matter by participating in the hearing and couldn’t produce an oral record of the proceedings proving he had withheld consent at that time.  Read More

Arbitrators’ award holding defendant bound by a collective bargaining agreement as a member of the multi-employer bargaining unit should have been confirmed despite court’s finding arbitrators’ construction of the agreement “implausible” and despite argument it violated public policy.  Read More

A defendant care-giver accused of elder neglect did not meet Welf. & Inst. Code 15610.57’s "having care and custody" requirement, when he merely furnished intermittent outpatient medical treatment to the elder, rather than providing for some/all of the elder’s fundamental needs.  Read More

A borrower who alleges defects in the transfer of her mortgage loan which render it void, can sufficiently establish the prejudice element of her wrongful foreclosure claim simply by alleging that the foreclosure was carried out by a party having no right to do so.  Read More

Manufacturer of auto brake forming tools is strictly liable for worker’s injury caused by breathing asbestos dust while using the tools in the intended manner on asbestos-laced auto brakes, even though manufacturer did not make the brakes.  Read More

Conservator and attorney fees are not considered “support and maintenance” for purposes of Probate Code 3089, which allows community property to be divided for the support and maintenance of an incompetent spouse if the competent spouse refuses to pay for it voluntarily.  Read More

While Congress may elevate intangible injuries to allow standing to sue, it cannot, by granting a right to statutory damages, create Article III standing when the plaintiff has suffered no actual injury, as can be the case when the defendant violates a statute’s purely procedural requirements.  Read More

“Actual fraud” for purposes of the 11 USC 523(a)(2)(A) exemption is construed broadly to encompass fraudulent transfers of property designed to hinder or delay creditors.  Read More

The Federal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act does not ban as false or misleading conduct collection letters sent by special counsel employed by the Attorney General to collect debts owed the state, using Attorney General stationery at the Attorney General’s direction.  Read More

Under Federal Securities Exchange Act section 27 (15 USC 78aa(a)), federal courts have exclusive jurisdiction if either (a) plaintiff’s claim is created by the Exchange Act, or rules or regulations adopted under it, or (b) if the suit necessarily raises a substantial, disputed federal securities law issue.  Read More

1 135 136 137 138 139 142