California Appellate Tracker

This decision affirms a summary judgment for Walmart on a model's claim for waiting time penalties for Walmart's failure to pay her all earned wages after each one- or two-day photo shoot.  Although triable issues of fact remained as to whether plaintiff was an employee to whom Labor Code 203 applied, Walmart had established its defense of a good faith… Read More

Following City of Oakland v. BP, PLC (9th Cir. 2020) 969 F.3d 895, this decision holds that there is no federal subject matter jurisdiction over San Mateo's public nuisance suit against energy companies for promoting use of their fossil fuels thereby causing global warming and rising sea levels that threatened harm to county property.  The county's state law claims do… Read More

Testimony by individual legislators (or here, county supervisors) is inadmissible to prove legislative intent since the requisite intent is that of the entire body, not the individual legislator or supervisor. Read More

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 was previously sold to another consumer is not a "new" car for these purposes even… Read More

The district court abused its discretion in denying class certification on the ground of lack of numerosity in this Title IX case charging unequal sports programs for females in Hawaii state schools.  The absolute size of the class--300 currently enrolled students--satisfied numerosity, as the plaintiff's claims challenged the state's overall treatment of female athletes, necessarily affecting all 300 female athletes. … Read More

Following Ritzen Group, Inc. v. Jackson Masonry, LLC (2020) 140 S.Ct. 582, this decision holds that an order denying relief from the automatic stay is immediately appealable so long as it finally resolves the issue of whether the movant is entitled to relief from stay on the basis on which relief was sought, even if the denial is without prejudice… Read More

In the 9th Circuit, courts apply the "primary purpose" test to determine whether an attorney-client communication for the dual purpose of tax or business advice and legal advice is attorney-client privileged.  This decision affirms the district court's use of that test rather than the "because of" test used for work product protection (from the totality of the circumstances was the… Read More

Generally, a landlord does not owe a duty of care with respect to open and obvious dangers on the property.  There is an exception, however, when it is foreseeable that, because of necessity or other circumstances, a person may choose to encounter the condition.  Here, the exception applied because the obviously dangerous stairway, with uneven risers and no handrail, led… Read More

In response to a contention interrogatory about whether plaintiff, the borrower, contended that notice of foreclosure had not been properly served, plaintiff answered "unsure."  This decision holds that plaintiff is bound by that deliberately ambiguous answer and cannot, in opposition to a summary judgment motion, suddenly claim that she now is certain she never received notice of the foreclosure sale. … Read More

Langford, a CHP officer, killed Silva's son while speeding to respond to an emergency call.  Langford was statutorily immune from liability under Vehicle Code 17004, but the CHP was not.  Gov. Code 815.2(b) immunizes a government entity when its employee is immune except as "otherwise provided by law."  Vehicle Code 17001 otherwise provides, making an entity liable for death or… Read More

A party moving under 11 USC 1112(b)(1) for relief such as conversion of a Chapter 11 case to a Chapter 7 case bears the burden of persuasion that cause exists for granting that relief.  Cause includes a material default in making payments due under the Chapter 11 plan.  Material isn't defined by the Bankruptcy Code, but gains meaning from the… Read More

A plaintiff who accomplishes no more than to defeat a defendant’s motion for qualified immunity is not entitled to attorney’s fees pursuant to § 1988(b), because the plaintiff has not yet prevailed on any claim. Read More

Defendant admitted negligence in an auto accident case.  But the trial court correctly denied plaintiff's motion for a directed verdict on causation.  Defendant's expert said only that the accident caused additional injury "if the plaintiff's testimony is believed."  The jury could and did disbelieve plaintiff.  Plaintiff could not complain on appeal about the wording of jury instructions since he invited… Read More

Defendant failed to preserve her contention that the trial court erred in allowing a Violence Protection Prevention proceeding to be conducted by Zoom with the plaintiffs and their witnesses seen by the court while defendant could only access the Zoom hearing by telephone.  Defendant didn't object on that ground in the trial court and so is barred from doing so… Read More

Defendant failed to preserve her contention that the trial court erred in allowing a Violence Protection Prevention proceeding to be conducted by Zoom with the plaintiffs and their witnesses seen by the court while defendant could only access the Zoom hearing by telephone.  Defendant didn't object on that ground in the trial court and so is barred from doing so… Read More

Plaintiff recovered a $157,000 judgment against defendant's corporation, then brought this independent suit against defendant claiming he was the corporation's alter ego and liable for the judgment against it.  On the first appeal from judgment on the pleadings against plaintiff, the court held that a plaintiff may pursue an independent action against the alter ego based on the judgment against… Read More

The San Diego city attorney sued the owner of Instacart for misclassifying its gig workers as independent contractors seeking an injunction and civil penalties under B&P Code 17200.  This decision holds that defendant cannot compel arbitration of the city attorney's claim.  Like the EEOC in EEOC v. Waffle House Inc. (2002) 122 S.Ct. 754, the city attorney here was not… Read More

An award of punitive damages was excessive where it equaled the full value of the only asset that the defendant was shown to own.  It is plaintiff's burden to produce evidence demonstrating the defendant's financial condition--including both assets and liabilities.  Here, plaintiff failed to present evidence of liabilities or show that defendant had more than a minimal annual income.  Proof… Read More

Florida does not violate the Medicare Act by asserting a lien for 37.5% of a Medicare recipient's settlement of his claim against a third party tortfeasor for injuries treated with Medicare benefits.  Under Florida law, there is a presumption that 37.5% of any personal injury settlement is paid for past and future medical expenses unless rebutted by clear and convincing… Read More

An airline employee whose duties involved loading and unloading baggage and cargo onto and from airplanes that flew interstate routes was an employee engaged in interstate commerce and thus the FAA did not apply to the arbitration clause in his employment agreement.  9 USC 1 exempts a class of workers--not a class of their employers; so the fact that Southwest… Read More