Case # | Name | Category | Court | Judge | Published |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
B154678
|
Mason v. California Dept. of Real Estate
Person seeking to recover under Real Estate Recovery Program must file application within one year of court judgment. |
Civil Procedure |
|
Dec. 3, 2002 | |
B148621
|
Health Industries of America Inc. v. L.A. County Metropolitan Transportation Authority
Action was improperly dismissed where Judge Pro Tem had authority to toll five-year statute period. |
Civil Procedure |
|
Dec. 3, 2002 | |
B152582
|
Sully-Miller Contracting Co. v. Gledson/Cashman Construction Inc.
Documents that were unilateral offers to settle and unsigned by all parties are not enforceable agreements under Code of Civil Procedure Section 664.6. |
Civil Procedure |
|
Dec. 3, 2002 | |
01-15052
|
Franklin v. Fox
Summary judgment for police is proper where they possessed sufficient evidence creating probable cause to arrest plaintiff. |
Civil Procedure |
|
Dec. 2, 2002 | |
01-0818
|
Millar v. Bay Area Rapid Transit District
Action that was removed to district court may be amended to dismiss federal claims. |
Civil Procedure |
|
Dec. 2, 2002 | |
B159156
|
Pagarigan v. Superior Court (Aetna U.S. Healthcare of California Inc.)
Health care provider cannot compel arbitration when agreement does not comply with state's disclosure requirements. |
Civil Procedure |
|
Nov. 25, 2002 | |
B154515
|
Levine v. Levine
Statute of limitations to sue trust is not tolled until beneficiaries reach age of majority. |
Civil Procedure |
|
Nov. 25, 2002 | |
H021961
|
Pavlovich v. Superior Court (DVD Copy Control Assoc. Inc.)
California's long-arm statute reaches Web site owners who make available for copying or distribution trade secrets of copyrighted material of California companies. |
Civil Procedure |
|
Nov. 25, 2002 | |
A096741
|
Slatkin v. White
Contractor may be entitled to assert mechanic's lien despite losing license during construction project. |
Civil Procedure |
|
Nov. 19, 2002 | |
B155440
|
Ocheltree v. Gourley
Trial court erred by not issuing alternative writ and ruling on merits of petition without reviewing administrative record. |
Civil Procedure |
|
Nov. 19, 2002 | |
B151867
|
People v. Torch Energy Services Inc.
Doctrine of judicial estoppel prevents party from asserting federal pre-emption regarding oil pipeline permit conditions imposed by county. |
Civil Procedure |
|
Nov. 19, 2002 | |
01-757
|
Syngenta Crop Protection Inc. v. Henson
All Writs Act does not authorize removal of case from state to federal court. |
Civil Procedure |
|
Nov. 12, 2002 | |
01-35467
|
Holder v. Holder
When parent filed for custody in state court, he did not waive his rights under Hague Convention in federal court. |
Civil Procedure |
|
Nov. 12, 2002 | |
00-15223
|
Hosaka v. United Airlines Inc.
Court improperly dismissed action under Warsaw Convention based on forum non conveniens. |
Civil Procedure |
|
Nov. 12, 2002 | |
01-35107
|
Humble v. Boeing Co.
Party's state law reasonable-accommodation claim is not pre-empted by Labor Management Relations Act. |
Civil Procedure |
|
Nov. 12, 2002 | |
01-16672
|
American Greyhound Racing Inc. v. Hull
Action challenging state authority in negotiating gaming compacts may not proceed due to Indian tribes' sovereign immunity. |
Civil Procedure |
|
Nov. 12, 2002 | |
00-16568
|
Wyatt v. Hubbard
Affirmative defense of exhaustion requirement must be proved and established by defendant. |
Civil Procedure |
|
Nov. 12, 2002 | |
A096658
|
The Governor Gray Davis Committee v. American Taxpayers Alliance
Party, which financed advertisement criticizing Governor's management of energy problems, is not compelled to comply with disclosure and reporting obligations of Political Reform Act. |
Civil Procedure |
|
Nov. 12, 2002 | |
01-16685
|
Sammartano v. First Judicial District Court
Motorcycle club members have right to preliminary injunctive relief to enjoin courthouse rules of conduct and attire pending final resolution of their action. |
Civil Procedure |
|
Nov. 10, 2002 | |
01-55002
|
Dole Food Co. Inc. v. Watts
When forum of corporation's principal place of business is same forum which defendants expressly aim acts, 'effects' test permits exercise of personal jurisdiction. |
Civil Procedure |
|
Nov. 10, 2002 | |
01-55466
|
U.S. v. $80,180.00 in U.S. Currency
Civil Asset Forfeiture Reform Act's heightened burden of proof does not have retroactive effect to cases pending at time of its effective date. |
Civil Procedure |
|
Nov. 10, 2002 | |
01-55154
|
Jarrow Formulas Inc. v. Nutrition Now Inc.
Laches bars manufacturer of nutritional supplements from suing its competitor for false advertising under Lanham Act. |
Civil Procedure |
|
Nov. 7, 2002 | |
00-71276
|
Puget Sound Energy Inc. v. United States
Circuit court lacks jurisdiction to review lawsuit against energy agency filed more than 90 days after rate became final. |
Civil Procedure |
|
Oct. 29, 2002 | |
01-55038
|
Schnabel v. Lui
Lawsuit against individual partner for breach of agreement does not require joinder of partnership as party. |
Civil Procedure |
|
Oct. 29, 2002 | |
F036920
|
Macomber v. Red Robin International Inc.
Court lacks jurisdiction to award attorney fees where no appeal was taken from post-judgment order denying fees. |
Civil Procedure |
|
Oct. 28, 2002 | |
99-55106
|
Konop v. Hawaiian Airlines Inc.
Court overturns grant of summary judgment in case where airline company management accesses pilot's Website under false pretenses. |
Civil Procedure |
|
Oct. 22, 2002 | |
99-56947
|
Miller v. Marriott International Inc.
Notice of appeal filed after judgment is announced is not effective until court determines subsequent Rule 60(b) motion. |
Civil Procedure |
|
Oct. 16, 2002 | |
01-8037
|
Robbins v. Wilkie
At pleading stage of civil RICO action, plaintiff is not required to plead with particularity to show standing. |
Civil Procedure |
|
Oct. 16, 2002 | |
01-1295
|
Floyd v. Ortiz
District court erred in ruling it lacked jurisdiction to review petition of prisoner seeking to enforce agreement with prison. |
Civil Procedure |
|
Oct. 16, 2002 | |
01-15116
|
Wander v. Kaus
There is no federal-question jurisdiction over lawsuit for damages brought under California's Disabled Person's Act. |
Civil Procedure |
|
Oct. 15, 2002 |