Case # | Name | Category | Court | Judge | Published |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
G034987
|
Navarro v. IHOP Properties Inc.
Franchisor's special motion to strike should have been granted because franchisee's claim was barred by 'litigation privilege.' |
Civil Procedure |
|
Feb. 21, 2006 | |
04-15047
|
Mpoyo v. Litton Electro-Optical Systems
District court properly dismissed, on res judicata grounds, plaintiff's claims which were brought two years after initial complaint was filed. |
Civil Procedure |
|
Feb. 14, 2006 | |
03-56719
|
Brown v. Dillard's Inc.
Employer cannot compel employee to honor arbitration agreement of which it itself is in material breach. |
Civil Procedure |
|
Feb. 14, 2006 | |
G034551
|
Evans v. CenterStone Development Co.
Sanctions are imposed on appellants and their counsel for bringing frivolous appeal and violating court rules. |
Civil Procedure |
|
Feb. 7, 2006 | |
H026867
|
Lockheed Corp. v. Continental Insurance Co.
Although trial court erred in sustaining demurrers of certain excess insurers, error does not require reversal of judgment for insurers. |
Civil Procedure |
|
Feb. 7, 2006 | |
C048750
|
Olsen v. Harbison
Appeal is dismissed as frivolous and sanctions are imposed on attorney because claim of court's abuse of discretion indisputably had no merit. |
Civil Procedure |
|
Feb. 6, 2006 | |
02-16947
|
Living Designs Inc. v. E.I. DuPont De Nemours and Co.
Fungicide developer failed to demonstrate that it was entitled to absolute immunity from civil RICO claim. |
Civil Procedure |
|
Feb. 6, 2006 | |
S127641
|
Frye v. Tenderloin Housing Clinic
Non-profit corporation that failed to register with state bar is not entitled to attorney fees. |
Civil Procedure |
|
Feb. 5, 2006 | |
02-16614
|
Felix v. Mayle
Habeas petitioner's new coerced confession claim relates back to date of timely-filed original petition. |
Civil Procedure |
|
Feb. 3, 2006 | |
S126630
|
Lefrancois v. Goel
Trial court had inherent power to grant motion for summary judgment after it had initially been denied. |
Civil Procedure |
|
Feb. 3, 2006 | |
D039399
|
Gates v. Discovery Communications Inc.
Anti-SLAPP motion was improperly denied where privacy action involved reports protected by First Amendment. |
Civil Procedure |
|
Feb. 3, 2006 | |
B156420
|
Walker v. L.A. County Metropolitan Transportation Authority
Order denying losing party's motion for new trial cannot be appealed. |
Civil Procedure |
|
Feb. 3, 2006 | |
B164118
|
Snowney v. Harrah's Entertainment Inc.
Owners of Nevada hotels accused of unfair business practices are subject to jurisdiction of California courts. |
Civil Procedure |
|
Feb. 3, 2006 | |
D046136
|
First Aid Services of San Diego Inc. v. California Employment Development Dept.
Employer's writ of administrative mandamus challenge to state agency's decision regarding employee's eligibility for unemployment compensation is barred. |
Civil Procedure |
|
Feb. 3, 2006 | |
B179572
|
Greka Integrated Inc. v. Lowrey
Party who agrees to scheduling of hearing on motion to strike after deadline may not later object to its timeliness. |
Civil Procedure |
|
Feb. 3, 2006 | |
B179809
|
Figueroa v. Northridge Hospital Medical Center
Order denying leave to amend complaint is not appealable, unless it has effect of eliminating all issues between parties. |
Civil Procedure |
|
Feb. 3, 2006 | |
B159591
|
Cronus Investments Inc. v. Concierge Services
Trial court properly stayed arbitration pending outcome of court action. |
Civil Procedure |
|
Feb. 3, 2006 | |
H027693
|
Vargas v. City of Salinas
City of Salinas prevails under anti-SLAPP statute because plaintiffs failed to show city's statements constitute impermissible campaign propaganda. |
Civil Procedure |
|
Feb. 3, 2006 | |
A102790
|
Grafton Partners LP v. Superior Court (PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP)
Parties' contract authorizing contractual predispute jury waiver is unenforceable for lack of statutory support. |
Civil Procedure |
|
Feb. 3, 2006 | |
A100258
|
American Financial Services Assn. v. City of Oakland
City ordinance regulating sub-prime home loans is not pre-empted by state law. |
Civil Procedure |
|
Feb. 3, 2006 | |
B167458
|
HLC Properties Limited v. Superior Court (MCA Records Inc.)
Entity that is legal successor of deceased individual's ongoing business organization is holder of attorney-client privilege that belonged to business organization. |
Civil Procedure |
|
Feb. 3, 2006 | |
B167044
|
Jevne v. Superior Court (JB Oxford Holdings Inc.)
State ethics standards for arbitrators are pre-empted by Securities Exchange Act. |
Civil Procedure |
|
Feb. 3, 2006 | |
05-17136
|
Doe v. United States
Grand jury witness is in contempt and has failed to show government's questions were primary product of unlawful surveillance. |
Civil Procedure |
|
Feb. 2, 2006 | |
B176874
|
Endres v. Moran
Defendants are not awarded attorney fees where only conspiracy claim was stricken pursuant to their special motion to strike. |
Civil Procedure |
|
Feb. 2, 2006 | |
B157650
|
The Home Insurance Co. v. Superior Court (Montrose Chemical Corp. of California)
Tension between primary and excess carriers sued in same lawsuit is sufficient to show substantial adversity and to create two defense sides. |
Civil Procedure |
|
Feb. 2, 2006 | |
03-15853
|
The San Remo Hotel v. San Francisco City and County
Federal takings claims are barred from litigation under doctrine of issue preclusion. |
Civil Procedure |
|
Feb. 2, 2006 | |
H025213
|
Le Francois v. Goel
Trial court had inherent power to grant motion for summary judgment after it had initially been denied. |
Civil Procedure |
|
Feb. 2, 2006 | |
04-1186
|
Wachovia Bank, National Association v. Schmidt
For purposes of diversity jurisdiction, federally chartered national bank is citizen only of state in which its main office is located. |
Civil Procedure |
|
Feb. 1, 2006 | |
04-1332
|
Will v. Hallock
Collateral order doctrine does not apply where asserted right against trial is based upon defense akin to claim preclusion or res judicata. |
Civil Procedure |
|
Feb. 1, 2006 | |
B176953
|
Colgan v. Leatherman Tool Group Inc.
Summary adjudication of liability under False Advertising Law is proper where tools represented as made in United States had parts made abroad. |
Civil Procedure |
|
Jan. 31, 2006 |