For reprint rights or to purchase a copy of your Daily Journal photo, email Jeremy_Ellis@dailyjournal.com for prices or call 213-229-5424.

To buy more copies, call 866-531-1492 or email subscribe@dailyjournal.com
This is the property of the Daily Journal Corporation and fully protected by copyright. It is made available only to Daily Journal subscribers for personal or collaborative purposes and may not be distributed, reproduced, modified, stored or transferred without written permission. Please click "Reprint" to order presentation-ready copies to distribute to clients or use in commercial marketing materials or for permission to post on a website. and copyright (showing year of publication) at the bottom.
Subscribe to the Daily Journal for access to Daily Appellate Reports, Verdicts, Judicial Profiles and more...
Daily appellate reports
Enewsletter Sign-up
    Filter by date
     to 
    Search by Case Name
    Search by Judge
    Search by Case Number
    Search by DJ Citation Number
    Search by Category
    Search by Court
Name Category Published
Biden v. Sierra Club
Order 		USSC Oct. 5, 2021
Bayer Healthcare Pharm. v. Ulleseit
Order 		USSC Oct. 5, 2021
U.S. v. Nasir
Order 		USSC Oct. 5, 2021
Joiner v. U.S.
Order 		USSC Oct. 5, 2021
Villarreal v. U.S.
Order 		USSC Oct. 5, 2021
Travis v. U.S.
Order 		USSC Oct. 5, 2021
Lipscomb v. U.S.
Order 		USSC Oct. 5, 2021
Rios Benitez v. U.S.
Order 		USSC Oct. 5, 2021
Kamahele v. U.S.
Order 		USSC Oct. 5, 2021
Maumau v. U.S.
Order 		USSC Oct. 5, 2021
Ayers v. U.S.
Order 		USSC Oct. 5, 2021
L.Q. v. California Hospital Medical Center
California Department of Health Care Services is entitled to recover the portion of Medi-Cal beneficiary's settlement attributable to past medical care paid through the Medi-Cal program. 		Health Care 2DCA/3 Oct. 5, 2021
Mt. Diablo Unified School Dist. v. Clayton Valley Charter High School
A school district cannot charge a charter school a pro rata share of overall district 'facilities costs' if the charter school already pays for those costs for its own premises. 		Education 1DCA/4 Oct. 5, 2021
Platt v. Moore
An Arizona forfeiture regime violated due process because it allowed the state's attorney to silently deem a petition to be defective and then wait out the limitations period. 		Civil Rights 9th Oct. 5, 2021
Turrieta v. Lyft, Inc.
Because the state is the real party in interest in Private Attorneys General Act claims, named plaintiffs do not have standing to object to related PAGA settlements. 		Employment Law 2DCA/4 Oct. 4, 2021
Becerra v. The McClatchy Co.
Trial courts should not use Employment Development Department regulations to analyze whether newspaper carriers are employers or independent contractors. 		Employment Law 5DCA Oct. 4, 2021
In re Miguel C.
When a juvenile presents evidence that placement in the Division of Juvenile Justice would be harmful, the prosecution must provide additional in-depth evidence to the contrary. 		Juveniles 4DCA/1 Oct. 4, 2021
Murchison v. County of Tehama
There was a triable issue as to whether police officers fell under the exigent circumstances exception when they entered plaintiff's property without a warrant upon discovering a rifle. 		Criminal Law and Procedure 3DCA Oct. 4, 2021
People v. Mani
Evidence of a defendant's prior uncharged acts was admissible because they were substantially similar to the charged act and therefore constituted evidence of intent. 		Evidence 3DCA Oct. 4, 2021
People v. Pillsbury
A recommendation by the Secretary of the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation gives the court authority to recall a defendant's sentence and then resentence him. 		Criminal Law and Procedure 3DCA Oct. 4, 2021
Folsom Police Dept. v. M.C.
Police may petition to dispose of the firearms of individuals who were placed on a mental health hold and assessed, but not admitted for further evaluation. 		Criminal Law and Procedure 3DCA Oct. 4, 2021
U.S. v. Madrid-Becerra
For sentencing purposes, Arizona's early conditional release program is a "criminal justice sentence." 		Criminal Law and Procedure 9th Oct. 4, 2021
Amended Opinion: Pavulak v. von Blanckensee
Federal prisoner could not show that he lacked an unobstructed procedural shot at presenting his challenge to sentencing enhancement under 28 U.S.C. Section 2241 petition. 		Criminal Law and Procedure 9th Oct. 4, 2021
Mudpie Inc. v. Travelers Casualty Insurance Company of America
Because COVID-19 and government orders did not cause physical damage, an insured could not recover business income losses under its insurance policy. 		Insurance 9th Oct. 4, 2021
Smith v. Kijakazi
An administrative law judge erred by reaching a single disability determination on a varied, multi-year period of alleged disability. 		Administrative Agencies 9th Oct. 4, 2021
Dietrich v. The Boeing Company
Because the grounds for removal were not unequivocally clear until plaintiff served amended discovery responses, defendant's notice of removal was timely. 		Civil Procedure 9th Oct. 4, 2021
People v. Wilson
Because the California Supreme Court changed the standards for certain felony murder inquiries, earlier jury findings do not mean defendant meets the modern standard. 		Criminal Law and Procedure 4DCA/1 Oct. 1, 2021
Findleton v. Coyote Valley Band of Pomo Indians
A party's appeal was dismissed under the disentitlement doctrine because it had repeatedly refused to comply with trial court orders. 		Civil Procedure 1DCA/2 Oct. 1, 2021
People v. Myles
A defendant's parole risk assessment and parole suitability hearing transcript were admissible in her resentencing hearing. 		Criminal Law and Procedure 1DCA/1 Oct. 1, 2021
People v. Sumagang
Statements made post Miranda warning are excludable when facts support conclusion that questioning was one interrogation with a Miranda warning sandwiched in between. 		Criminal Law and Procedure 6DCA Oct. 1, 2021
By using our website, you agree to our use of cookies in accordance with our cookie policy. You can learn more about how we use cookies by reviewing our Privacy Policy here.