California Appellate Tracker

A probate court order granting, in part, a petition under Probate Code 17200 seeking to invalidate a provision of a testamentary trust was an appealable order under Probate Code 1304 despite leaving undecided certain aspects of the relief that the petition requested.   Read More

Real Property, Restraint on Alienation, Testamentary Trust Restriction On Resale, 1, 11 Civ. Code 711 voids “conditions restraining alienation, when repugnant to the interest created."  This decision holds that section 711 applies to restrictions a testamentary trust imposes on resale of property to be conveyed to a beneficiary under the trust.  Here, in an attempt to keep the family home… Read More

Debt Collection, False Representation, Misidentifying The Debtor, 1, 11 Plaintiff, a debt collector, sued one Yolanda Rodriguez on a debt owed by a different woman with the same name, but a different age and Social Security Number.  After this was shown to plaintiff, it dismissed the suit, but this decision holds that the trial court erred in granting plaintiff's Anti-SLAPP… Read More

Appeals, Appealable Orders, Probate, Order Suspending A Trustee & Appointing Interim Trustee, 1, 11 An probate court order suspending a trustee and appointing an interim trustee is not directly appealable.  Probate Code 1300-1304 list the types of probate court orders that are appealable.  Suspension of a trustee is a provisional remedy; whereas as removal of a trustee is a final… Read More

The trial court erred in granting defendant summary judgment on plaintiff's FEHA claims for sex discrimination and harassment.  On the discrimination claim, plaintiff's evidence showed that male flight attendants were not disciplined as severely as she was for posting suggestive pictures in uniform on her social media page.  Additional evidence raising a triable issue as to discrimination included the evidence… Read More

Employment, PAGA Suit, Standing To Bring PAGA Claim After Arbitration Loss On Individual Claims, 1, 11 Following Rocha v. U-Haul Co. of California (2023) 88 Cal.App.5th 65 and not Gavriiloglou v. Prime Healthcare Management, Inc. (2022) 83 Cal.App.5th 595, this decision holds that an arbitration award in the employer's favor on all of  the employee's individual Labor Code violation claims… Read More

The arbitrator issued what he titled an Interim Award which seemed to resolve all of plaintiff's claims against her.  However, the award stated that it would become final unless a party filed a motion within 20 days pointing to an issue that the Interim Award did not resolve.  Plaintiff filed such a motion within 20 days, pointing out that the… Read More

After the trial court sustained defendants' demurrer with leave to amend, plaintiff filed an amended complaint which no longer named the HOA as a defendant and stated no claim against it.  Under CCP 581(f)(2), the trial court had discretion (which it did not abuse) to dismiss the HOA with prejudice.  If plaintiff had wished to dismiss the HOA without prejudice,… Read More

Four requirements must be met to trigger the federal two-dismissal rule (FRCivP 41(a)(1)(B)): (1) the plaintiff voluntarily dismissed an action in either state or federal court, (2) thereafter the plaintiff voluntarily dismissed an action pending in federal court, (3) the two dismissals concerned the same claim, and (4) the plaintiff seeks to raise the twice-dismissed claim again in federal court. … Read More

Employee's pre-suit letter to the employer's HR department was protected by the litigation privilege even though the letter did not expressly threaten suit.  By the time, plaintiff had complained many times to management without redress and had hired a lawyer.  She also submitted a declaration attesting that she was seriously contemplating suit at the time she sent the letter. Read More

(Plaintiff's letter written to defendant's HR department shortly before plaintiff sued for wrongful termination was protected activity under CCP 415.16(e).  Plaintiff's boss failed to show that the letter fell within the narrow Flatley v. Mauro (2006) 39 Cal.4th 299 exception for patently illegal conduct.  Here, plaintiff disputed the boss' assertion that plaintiff had threatened to defame him to his superiors… Read More

Consumer Protection, Warranty, Song-Beverly Act, Repair or Refund Remedy, Used Car, Unexpired Warranty, 1, 10 The Song-Beverly Act's replace-or-refund remedy applies only to unrepaired defects in new cars, which the Act defines to include dealer owned and demonstrator cars or other motor vehicles sold with a manufacturer’s new car warranty.  (Civ. Code 1793.22(e)(2).)  This decision holds that a car which… Read More

Employment, Wage & Hour, Public Employers Not Covered By Labor Code, 1, 8 Public employers such as the hospital authority defendant in this case are exempt from Labor Code provisions governing meal and rest breaks (§§ 226.7, 512) and related statutes governing the full and timely payment of wages (see § 220, subd. (b)) as well as from PAGA penalties… Read More

Summary judgment was properly granted to defendant in this slip and fall case.  Under Gov. Code 830 and 835, a governmental entity is liable for injuries caused by a dangerous condition of property only if the condition was caused by the entity's negligence or the entity had actual or constructive knowledge of the condition.  Here, plaintiff slipped on an ice… Read More

A prescriptive easement requires proof that the use of the easement was hostile and adverse to the owner of the property crossed by the easement, while express easement and easement by implication require proof of that property owner's express or implied consent to the easement.  Here, the trial court's statement of decision found that plaintiff had proved an easement by… Read More

In this asbestosis case, the trial court erred in granting a directed verdict against defendant's sophisticated user defense.  Plaintiff was the owner and operator of a small auto repair shop.  He was required to be knowledgeable about and remediate health risks to the workers he employed.  He admitted he was aware of OSHA requirements regarding asbestos in car brakes.  There… Read More

The trial court erred in handling the allocation of fault issue in this asbestosis case.  It should have included on the special verdict form all parties potentially liable for causing plaintiff's exposure to asbestos, including asbestos-containing joint tape manufacturers as well as auto brake manufacturers.  Plaintiff was an auto repairman but admitted that he had been present during a home… Read More

This decision holds that federal law banning cultivation of cannabis preempts California law legalizing its cultivation.  Hence, the county erred in granting a conditional use permit allowing a private party to use property to grow cannabis.  The neighbor who objected to use of the easement over his property to transport the cannabis wins. Read More

Agreeing with Limon v. Circle K Stores, Inc. (2022) 84 Cal.App.5th 671, this decision holds that to have standing to sue in California state court, a plaintiff must have a beneficial interest in the claim and that the beneficial interest test duplicates the federal Article III injury in fact requirement.  Informational injury--in this case not providing a statutorily mandated disclosure--does… Read More

Deciding an issue left open in Barefoot v. Jennings (2020) 8 Cal.5th 822, this decision holds that heirs who would take by intestate succession have standing to sue in probate court to invalidate a trust disposing of the decedent's estate to a third party on the ground of undue influence, lack of capacity, and forgery.  Probate Code 17200 states that… Read More