Case # | Name | Category | Court | Judge | Published |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
D021721
|
Wilson v. Science Applications International Corp.
Public members, not parties to proceedings, can challenge continued need for order sealing record. |
Civil Procedure |
|
Jul. 19, 1999 | |
S057557
|
McMillan v. Superior Court (Nelson)
Plaintiff's lawyer cannot be ordered to pay client's portion of court-ordered discovery referee fee. |
Civil Procedure |
|
Jul. 19, 1999 | |
95-16666
|
Acri v. Varian Associates Inc.
District court can exercise supplemental jurisdiction over state claims without determining whether it should be declined. |
Civil Procedure |
|
Jul. 18, 1999 | |
98-15693
|
Olson v. Morris
Legal and factual issues that are or can be litigated before state licensing board can't be relitigated in federal court due to res judicata. |
Civil Procedure |
|
Jul. 15, 1999 | |
G015449
|
Don Jose's Restaurant Inc. v. Truck Insurance Exchange
One final judgment rule precludes appeal of some claims with remaining claims left for trial. |
Civil Procedure |
|
Jul. 15, 1999 | |
G020021
|
Calcor Space Facility Inc. v. Superior Court (Thiem Industries Inc.)
Subpoena only describing broad categories of documents is unduly burdensome and abuses discovery system. |
Civil Procedure |
|
Jul. 15, 1999 | |
D022339
|
Ryder v. Peterson
No recovery of attorney fees after voluntary pretrial dismissal despite contractual agreement to the contrary. |
Civil Procedure |
|
Jul. 15, 1999 | |
C022370
|
Wolfgram v. Wells Fargo Bank
Vexatious litigant statute, directed at individuals with history of unsuccessful propria persona cases, isn't unconstitutional. |
Civil Procedure |
|
Jul. 13, 1999 | |
A074435 and A074430
|
Edwards v. Centex Real Estate Corp.
Party seeking to use litigation privilege to exclude prelitigation communications must show litigation was proposed. |
Civil Procedure |
|
Jul. 13, 1999 | |
H014330
|
Windsor Square Homeowners Association v. Citation Homes
Builder's affirmative defense of res judicata is naturally tried to the court, not jury. |
Civil Procedure |
|
Jul. 12, 1999 | |
E019570
|
County of Riverside v. Superior Court (Hill)
County is served improperly by parties seeking to invalidate official actions involving redevelopment project. |
Civil Procedure |
|
Jul. 12, 1999 | |
A073496
|
La Galleria Condominium Owners' Association v. Wells Fargo Bank
Award of attorney fees to defendant as prevailing party after plaintiff's voluntary dismissal is error. |
Civil Procedure |
|
Jul. 12, 1999 | |
S048329
|
Torres, Sr. v. Automobile Club of Southern California
Defendant isn't entitled to new trial on liability and compensatory damages following reversal of punitive award. |
Civil Procedure |
|
Jul. 12, 1999 | |
95-56565
|
Wilson v. City of San Jose
Dismissal intent letter to defendant supports voluntary dismissal after clerk improperly refuses to file dismissal notice. |
Civil Procedure |
|
Jul. 11, 1999 | |
95-16756
|
Polido v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co.
Court needn't exercise jurisdiction over removed state declaratory claim on dismissal of obligatory monetary claims. |
Civil Procedure |
|
Jul. 9, 1999 | |
A073483
|
Jackson v. Wells Fargo Bank
Stipulation to 'artificially' dismiss claim to allow appeal of summarily adjudicated issues is not permitted. |
Civil Procedure |
|
Jul. 9, 1999 | |
S058301
|
Hosking v. Carrier Corporation et al.
Despite voluntary dismissal of action,defendant is entitled to attorney feesunder terms of contract. |
Civil Procedure |
|
Jul. 8, 1999 | |
G019481
|
Pham v. Nguyen
Continuance requests stipulated to by both parties are encouraged to be granted despite not warranted here. |
Civil Procedure |
|
Jul. 8, 1999 | |
97-15844
|
TwoRivers v. Lewis
State law regarding retroactive application of amended statute doesn't apply even if state limitation period is adopted in federal civil rights claim. |
Civil Procedure |
|
Jul. 7, 1999 | |
F032022
|
Jauregi v. Superior Court (People)
Hearsay isn't admissible to prove standing in drug trafficking related forfeiture proceeding. |
Civil Procedure |
|
Jul. 7, 1999 | |
B122789
|
South Bay Building Enterprises Inc. v. Riviera Lend-Lease Inc.
Complaint can be amended at trial when operative facts are included in complaint and evidence supporting liability is adduced from defense witnesses. |
Civil Procedure |
|
Jul. 7, 1999 | |
G015532
|
Mayhew v. Benninghoff
Attorney's failure to dispel presumption he took undue advantage of client requires denial of arbitration request. |
Civil Procedure |
|
Jul. 7, 1999 | |
C021327
|
Cox v. California Highway Patrol
Forfeiture statute's requirement for hearing within 90 days of seizure is directory. |
Civil Procedure |
|
Jul. 7, 1999 | |
B088555
|
Estate of William A. McCall v. Four Star Music Co.
Tennessee settlement as to one tortfeasor, including California satisfaction of judgment, doesn't release nonsettling party. |
Civil Procedure |
|
Jul. 6, 1999 | |
95-56660
|
United States ex rel. Gibeault v. Texas Instruments Corp.
District court can restructure settlement in False Claims Act case to secure government's share of proceeds. |
Civil Procedure |
|
Jul. 6, 1999 | |
94-15932 and 94-16510
|
Budget Rent-A-Car Inc. v. Higashiguchi
Declaratory action plaintiff meets jurisdictional amount in controversy by aggregating multiple claims against single insured. |
Civil Procedure |
|
Jul. 6, 1999 | |
B108200
|
Tylo v. Superior Court (Spelling Entertainment Group Inc.)
Deposition questions relating to actress' emotional distress from her marriage constitute impermissible 'fishing expedition.' |
Civil Procedure |
|
Jul. 6, 1999 | |
G019628
|
Korea Data Systems Co. Ltd. v. Superior Court (Aamazing Technologies Corp.)
Waiver of attorney-client privilege is not authorized sanction for failure to file timely privilege log. |
Civil Procedure |
|
Jul. 6, 1999 | |
C021940
|
Pate v. Channel Lumber Co.
Evidence preclusion sanction against defendant for 'playing fast' with discovery rules is justified. |
Civil Procedure |
|
Jul. 6, 1999 | |
S053577
|
Kingston Constructors Inc. v. Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority
California courts lack jurisdiction over actions brought by or against Washington D.C. transit authority. |
Civil Procedure |
|
Jul. 6, 1999 |