When, on a summary judgment motion in a case removed from state court, a federal court determines it lacks subject matter jurisdiction because the plaintiff lacks Article III standing, the federal court should remand the case to state court, not dismiss it. Read More
In compliance with the Rees-Levering Act, a car purchase agreement properly disclosed the buyer’s $3,000 as a down payment, rather than as a deferred down payment, even though the payment was by post-dated checks that the dealer orally agreed not to deposit for several days. Read More
An order compelling arbitration of an employee’s individual claims, dismissing his class claims, and staying his PAGA claims is not appealable even under the “death knell” doctrine since the PAGA claims survive and provide adequate incentive to prosecute the suit. Read More
Even though it did not expressly so state, given the parties’ prior settlement negotiations, a collection attorney's voicemail message to debtor sufficiently disclosed even to the least sophisticated debtor that the message was from a debt collector. Read More
Now-defunct Nevada statute violated due process by granting homeowners’ associations priority over mortgage lenders and other senior lienholders and allowing them foreclose liens for unpaid dues without requiring notice to a senior lienholder unless it affirmatively requested notice. Read More
An insurer failed to satisfy its obligation to settle a case of obvious liability within policy limits when it offered the full policy limits promptly, but demanded a full release of all claims against the insured in return—a broader release than it was entitled to. Read More
Ordinarily, when an appeal is mooted, the appellate court simply dismisses the appeal, but it can also vacate judgment and remand to allow the trial court to dismiss the case if legislative or administrative action has mooted the entire case; here, however, the appellant itself mooted its own appeal so it should not be allowed escape the consequences of a… Read More
The Financial Institutions Reform, Recovery, and Enforcement Act (“FIRREA”) provides an extension on the statutes of limitations for contract and tort claims in actions brought by the National Credit Union Administration Board, which supersedes other limitations periods set by state or federal statute. Read More
The relevant limitations period on a quiet title claim is governed by underlying basis of the claim; in this case, the gravamen of the quiet title claim was that defendant induced her erstwhile boyfriend to sign title transfer documents while inebriated, so the three-year limitations period applicable to fraud claims applied. Read More
A settlement payment that is clawed back in bankruptcy as a voidable preference does not count as performance of the settlement agreement, so the party entitled to payment can pursue the debtor’s guarantors for the clawed back amount. Read More
In dispute between HOA and homeowner over improvements to homeowner’s patio, HOA prevailed and was therefore entitled to mandatory fee award under Civ. Code 5975(c), but only for portion of attorney’s fees incurred after the homeowner failed to complete agreed changes within the 60 days allowed under the parties’ settlement agreement. Read More
In this suit for extra compensation under plaintiff's subcontract to supply expansion joints for a bridge overpass construction project, extra compensation was reasonably calculable as it depended solely on the difference in price between cheaper two expansion joint assemblies and the four expansion joint assemblies that the defendant belatedly insisted on, so trial court should have awarded pre-judgment interest. Read More
Claims under an Oregon statute for wages "due and owing" were preempted by the National Labor Relations Act, because the court would have to interpret the collective bargaining agreement in order to decide what wages were due and owing under its terms; nonetheless, a claim that the employer failed to promptly pay health insurance premiums from sums it deducted from… Read More
In fee-sharing cases under the “common fund” or “common benefit” theories of fee awards, the court may properly assess the fee as a percentage of the common recovery, even though the “hours times hourly rate plus multiplier” approach has been adopted as the sole way to calculate fees under fee-shifting contract or statutory provisions. Read More
A suit brought in a city’s name by a private attorney is not an enforcement action brought in the name of the People of the State of California by the Attorney General, or a district attorney or a city attorney acting as a public prosecutor and so is not exempt from the Anti-SLAPP statute. Read More
A citizen suit against his city council was not a public interest suit exempted from Anti-SLAPP protections, since the citizen in question would have benefited personally from a decision in his favor. Read More
Leaseholder whose lease stated he would indemnify the lessor against claims “arising out of, in connection with, or involving the use or occupancy of the leased premises” was not obligated to indemnify lessor against an injury that occurred in the common area (here, the stairs), even though injured party was a worker climbing stairs with a bucket of soapy water… Read More
In a medical malpractice action, a foreign doctor may testify as an expert on the standard of care since that standard is no longer governed by practice in the locality where the defendant doctor practiced. Read More
An injured worker did not file a formal worker’s compensation claim until 7 years after his injury, but the insurer could not raise a successful laches defense to the claim since the worker’s employer received knowledge of his injury the day after it was sustained. Read More
Trial court did not abuse its discretion in admitting photos of cars post-accident without supporting expert testimony since they showed minimal car damages, impugning credibility of plaintiff who claimed to be injured in a car accident but had no medical confirmation. Read More
