Case # | Name | Category | Court | Judge | Published |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
G062330
|
MACH-1 RSMH, LLC v. Darras
Despite asserting claim as common law fraudulent transfer, because it met the Uniform Voidable Transactions Act's substantive requirements, it was governed by the Act and required to meet its filing deadline. |
Commercial Law |
|
K. O'Leary | Aug. 7, 2024 |
D081587
|
Goldstein et al. v. Superior Court (San Diego Guns, LLC)
The statutory exemption allowing under 21-year-olds to purchase rifles with a valid hunting license does not apply until the license period begins. |
Commercial Law |
|
J. Irion | Jul. 21, 2023 |
21-16466
|
Enigma Software Group USA LLC v. Malwarebytes, Inc.
Computer software company's false advertising lawsuit against its competitor was sustained because the competitor's statements made a specific claim about the software's characteristics. |
Commercial Law |
|
R. Clifton | Jun. 5, 2023 |
E076823
|
GRFCO, Inc. v. Superior Court (Dept. Industrial Relations)
Contracting companies were properly debarred from acting as public works contractors because they knowingly violated apprenticeship requirements by failing to follow the regulations printed on the apprenticeship forms. |
Commercial Law |
|
M. Ramirez | Apr. 5, 2023 |
C094984
|
Modification: Dept. of Alcoholic Beverage Control v. Alcoholic Beverage Control Appeals Board
Vineyard giving a nonoperational pizza oven to a grocery store for a promotional display did not constitute furnishing a "thing of value" in violation of the Business and Professions Code. |
Commercial Law |
|
P. Krause | Aug. 25, 2022 |
C094984
|
Dept. of Alcoholic Beverage Control v. Alcoholic Beverage Control Appeals Board
Vineyard giving a nonoperational pizza oven to a grocery store for a promotional display did not constitute furnishing a "thing of value" in violation of the Business and Professions Code. |
Commercial Law |
|
P. Krause | Aug. 18, 2022 |
20-56181
|
Produce Pay Inc. v. Izguerra Produce Inc.
Where the parties' transactions resembled a consignment, the seller was entitled to Perishable Agricultural Commodities Act protections. |
Commercial Law |
|
P. Kelly | Jul. 11, 2022 |
H045900
|
Kim v. TWA Construction, Inc.
A contractor is not entitled to compensation for work performed by an unlicensed subcontractor. |
Commercial Law |
|
A. Danner | May 17, 2022 |
B304897
|
Modification: Sky Posters Inc. v. Dept. of Transportation
Redevelopment displays qualify as an on-premises display exempt from Outdoor Advertising Act requirements if the display advertises businesses in the area and is not merely incidental. |
Commercial Law |
|
G. Feuer | May 13, 2022 |
B304897
|
Sky Posters Inc. v. Dept. of Transportation
Redevelopment displays qualify as an on-premises display exempt from Outdoor Advertising Act requirements if the display advertises businesses in the area and is not merely incidental. |
Commercial Law |
|
G. Feuer | May 12, 2022 |
B303314
|
SwiftAir v. Southwest Airlines
Because inflight entertainment and wireless internet access are services, state law causes of action involving those services are preempted by the federal Airline Deregulation Act. |
Commercial Law |
|
J. Segal | Apr. 7, 2022 |
20-55930
|
R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. v. County of Los Angeles
Los Angeles County's ban on the sale of flavored tobacco products is not expressly or implied preempted by the Tobacco Control Act since it fits under the Act's savings and preservation clauses. |
Commercial Law |
|
L. VanDyke | Mar. 21, 2022 |
B307780
|
Rice v. Downs
Disgorgement of fees paid pursuant to charging order was not appropriate when the party holding fees had a perfected security interest with higher priority than the judgment holder seeking disgorgement. |
Commercial Law |
|
H. Bendix | Dec. 29, 2021 |
E073950
|
Peviani v. Arbors at California Oaks Property Owner
Trial court's reasoning indicated that it confused false advertising cause of action with fraud cause of action in its commonality analysis for class certification. |
Commercial Law |
|
D. Miller | Apr. 8, 2021 |
G056061
|
Front Line Motor Cars v. Webb
Section 2982.5 of the Rees-Levering Motor Vehicles Sales and Finance Act allows the sanctioning of dealers who do not intend in good faith to enter into bona fide credit-sales with buyers. |
Commercial Law |
|
R. Ikola | May 14, 2019 |