| Case # | Name | Category | Court | Judge | Published |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
D085178
|
Reyes v. Hi-Grade Materials Co.
Death knell doctrine did not apply to order denying class certification where individual and representative Private Attorneys General Act claims remained pending even when plaintiff voluntarily dismissed the remaining claims. |
Employment Law, Civil Procedure |
|
M. Buchanan | May 1, 2025 |
|
23-861
|
Feliciano v. Department of Transportation
A reservist seeking differential pay for service "during a national emergency," need not show that their service bears a substantive connection to a particular emergency. |
Government |
|
N. Gorsuch | May 1, 2025 |
|
19-55616
|
Cassirer v. Thyssen-Bornemisza Collection Foundation
Order |
|
May 1, 2025 | ||
|
20-15948
|
Teter v. Lopez
Order |
|
May 1, 2025 | ||
|
D084344
|
Marriage of A.M. and R.Y.
Given the totality of the circumstances, evidence submitted by domestic violence restraining order applicant was legally sufficient to establish abuse. |
Family Law |
|
M. Buchanan | May 1, 2025 |
|
23-1956
|
U.S. v. Turrey
Criminal defendant waived claims regarding alleged prejudicial statements made during jury selection issues because his counsel invited the error and failed to object or request remedial action at the time. |
Criminal Law and Procedure |
|
P. Curiam (9th Cir.) | May 1, 2025 |
|
A171241
|
Goebner v. Superior Court (McDonald)
Trial court erroneously dismissed demurrer to probate petition as time-barred under the Code of Civil Procedure, where relevant Probate Code provision should have been applied. |
Trust and Estates, Civil Procedure |
|
V. Rodriguez | May 1, 2025 |
|
A172485
|
B.D. v. Superior Court (Contra Costa County Children and Family Services Bureau)
Although mother demonstrated substantive progress in her treatment plan, juvenile court's decision to terminate reunification services was harmless because the children were unlikely to be returned within 18 months. |
Dependency |
|
C. Fujisaki | May 1, 2025 |
|
D083555
|
Modification: Cleveland Nat. Forest Foundation v. County of San Diego
San Diego County's "thresholds of significance," used for assessing the environmental impact of land-use projects, were unsupported by substantial evidence. |
Environmental Law |
|
W. Dato | Apr. 30, 2025 |
|
B333182
|
De la Cruz v. Mission Hills Shopping Center LLC
Despite contract between defendants and plaintiff's employer that allegedly relieved defendants from liability for negligent acts, summary judgment was not appropriate where employee-plaintiff had not signed the contract. |
Torts, Contracts |
|
J. Wiley | Apr. 30, 2025 |
|
23-55532
|
Alves v. County of Riverside
Mixed jury verdict on Fourth Amendment excessive force and state negligence claims was reasonable because the federal and state standards focus on different aspects of the totality of the circumstances. |
Civil Rights, Torts |
|
G. Sanchez | Apr. 30, 2025 |
|
B334490
|
People v. Benson
Trial court did not abuse its discretion by admitting gang-related evidence, as it was relevant to issues of identity, motive, and witness credibility. |
Criminal Law and Procedure |
|
M. Stratton | Apr. 30, 2025 |
|
S141519
|
Modification: People v. Hin
Trial court abused its discretion in admitting rap song from a CD found in defendant's bedroom during both the guilt and penalty phases. |
Criminal Law and Procedure |
|
G. Liu | Apr. 28, 2025 |
|
24-10526
|
In re Global One Media, Inc.
Failure to file UCC financing statement in debtor's state of incorporation meant creditor's security interest in personal property was not perfected despite filing statements in states where property was located. |
Bankruptcy |
|
J. Brand | Apr. 25, 2025 |
|
25-2358
|
Community Legal Services in East Palo Alto v. U.S. Dept. of Health and Human Services
Order |
|
Apr. 29, 2025 | ||
|
21-70282
|
City and County of San Francisco v. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Order |
|
Apr. 29, 2025 | ||
|
22-10058
|
U.S. v. Pangang Group Company, Ltd.
Defendants, companies owned by the Chinese government, did not enjoy foreign sovereign immunity from criminal prosecution in U.S. courts related to economic espionage charges. |
Criminal Law and Procedure, Commercial Law |
|
D. Collins | Apr. 29, 2025 |
|
24-1013
|
U.S. v. Gonzalez-Loera
Retroactive sentencing guideline providing for offense-level reduction contained two distinct requirements for eligibility, so defendant who failed to meet both was ineligible for sentencing reduction. |
Criminal Law and Procedure |
|
M. Bennett | Apr. 29, 2025 |
|
G061412
|
Nazaryan v. Femtometrix
Civil litigation privilege did not bar breach of contract claim predicated on defendants' fraudulent characterization of settlement stock as non-employee compensation. |
Contracts, Tax |
|
M. Sanchez | Apr. 25, 2025 |
|
22-56181
|
Amended Opinion: The Ohio House LLC v. City of Costa Mesa
Living facility's disparate-treatment claim failed because the differential treatment imposed under the City's ordinances facially benefitted the protected class. |
Disability Discrimination |
|
D. Forrest | Apr. 25, 2025 |
|
23-55259
|
Amended Opinion: Consumer Financial Protection Bureau v. Cashcall, Inc.
Consumer lender failed to argue constitutional right to jury trial violation when it proceeded with a bench trial in the first phase of trial. |
Consumer Law |
|
E. Miller | Apr. 25, 2025 |
|
24-241
|
Fallon v. Dudek
In social security context, district court properly refused revisiting its evaluation of medical experts' opinions settled in its first opinion and not part of remand proceedings under the law-of-the-case doctrine. |
Civil Procedure, Administrative Agencies |
|
D. Forrest | Apr. 25, 2025 |
|
24-2379
|
Oppenheimer & Co., Inc. v. Mitchell
Because purported Ponzi scheme victims were not Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) member's customers, FINRA mandatory arbitration requirement was inapplicable. |
Securities, Arbitration |
|
M. Smith | Apr. 25, 2025 |
|
21-30266
|
U.S. v. Atherton
Order |
|
Apr. 25, 2025 | ||
|
S281599
|
People v. Antonelli
Defendants convicted of murder under the provocative act doctrine before 2009 are not categorically ineligible for resentencing relief under Penal Code Section 1172.6. |
Criminal Law and Procedure |
|
J. Groban | Apr. 25, 2025 |
|
S282968
|
New England Country Foods v. Vanlaw Food Products
Limitations on damages for willful injury to the person or property of another, as well as full releases, are prohibited by Civil Code Section 1668. |
Contracts, Remedies |
|
G. Liu | Apr. 25, 2025 |
|
B335445
|
Williams v. Alacrity Solutions Group
To be a Private Attorneys General Act plaintiff, a private individual must seek to recover civil penalties on their own behalf for that violation and establish that the "individual claim" is timely. |
Employment Law |
|
B. Hoffstadt | Apr. 24, 2025 |
|
D084008
|
People v. Glass
In light of *People v. Patton*, case was remanded for defendant to provide additional facts to support his Penal Code Section 1172.6 resentencing request despite record supporting his ineligibility. |
Criminal Law and Procedure |
|
J. Castillo | Apr. 24, 2025 |
|
24-1025
|
Simon v. City and County of San Francisco
GPS location tracking and sharing for defendants granted pretrial release subject to electronic monitoring was not facially unconstitutional. |
Criminal Law and Procedure |
|
J. Bybee | Apr. 24, 2025 |
|
23-3858
|
Oscar v. Bondi
Haitian asylum-seeker who was a permanent resident in Chile prior to arriving in the U.S. was properly denied asylum as "firmly resettled". |
Immigration |
|
S. Ikuta | Apr. 24, 2025 |
For reprint rights or to purchase a copy of your Daily Journal photo, email jeremy@reprintpros.com for prices or call 949-702-5390. To buy more copies, call 866-531-1492 or email subscribe@dailyjournal.com