| Case # | Name | Category | Court | Judge | Published |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
A173303
|
Vallejo City Unified School Dist. v. Superior Court (Caguin)
Despite allegations of prior on-campus bullying addressed by school personnel, Education Code section 44808 immunized the school district from liability for claims premised on student's off-campus suicide. |
Education, Immunity |
|
J. Clay | Jan. 29, 2026 |
|
24-5810
|
Avery v. TekSystems Inc.
District court properly declined to compel arbitration, where employer implemented new arbitration agreement requiring employee-class members to "opt out" to remain part of the pending class litigation. |
Arbitration |
|
L. Koh | Jan. 29, 2026 |
|
C100552
|
Modification: Dept. of Water Resources v. Metropolitan Water Dist.
Because a water conveyance project was not a "further modification" of an existing project under Water Code section 11620, the Department of Water Resources lacked authority to issue construction bonds. |
Administrative Agencies |
|
P. Krause | Jan. 29, 2026 |
|
B343506
|
Conservatorship of B.K.
Trial court did not need to provide additional advisements or obtain a more detailed personal waiver of conservatee's jury trial right where totality of circumstances supported conservatee's knowing and voluntary waiver. |
Conservatorship |
|
A. Collins | Jan. 29, 2026 |
|
B335736
|
Matthews v. Ryan
998 settlement offer contingent upon acceptance by defendant's insurer was valid because settlements with parties defended by insurers are always implicitly premised on such conditions. |
Civil Procedure, Remedies |
|
H. Bendix | Jan. 29, 2026 |
|
B340818
|
Trustees of the California State University v. Public Employment Relations Bd.
Because California State University did not refuse to bargain with the California Faculty Association before implementing its vaccination policy, it did not violate its duty to bargain in good faith under HERRA. |
Labor Law |
|
M. Hanasono | Jan. 28, 2026 |
|
F087625
|
People v. Dixon
Defendant's grand jury transcripts were not admissible under Penal Code section 1172.6(d)(3)'s hearsay exception. |
Criminal Law and Procedure, Evidence |
|
K. Meehan | Jan. 28, 2026 |
|
A172153
|
Modification: Marriage of Starr
Trial court erred in treating amended petition's separation date as a binding judicial admission when opposing party's actions supported it was still a contested issue. |
Civil Procedure, Family Law |
|
J. Goldman | Jan. 27, 2026 |
|
25-51
|
Klein v. Martin
Where state court reasonably applied *Brady*'s materiality standard, no federal habeas relief should have been granted. |
Habeas Corpus |
|
P. Curiam (USSC) | Jan. 27, 2026 |
|
G065447
|
Siam v. Superior Court (People)
Trial court abused its discretion by concluding defendant's symptoms would not respond to treatment and was not suitable for mental health diversion despite unopposed opinion of qualified mental health expert. |
Criminal Law and Procedure |
|
T. Delaney | Jan. 27, 2026 |
|
S275272
|
Modification: Los Angeles Police Protective League v. City of Los Angeles
Requiring complainants to read and sign advisory notice that filing a knowingly false complaint of police misconduct was a crime placed an unconstitutional burden on speech. |
Constitutional Law |
|
Jan. 26, 2026 | |
|
20-99014
|
Beeler v. Broomfield
District court properly denied death-row petitioner's habeas petition, where California Supreme Court could have reasonably concluded the evidence did not sufficiently support his incompetency claims. |
Habeas Corpus |
|
J. Nguyen | Jan. 26, 2026 |
|
B337904
|
Yeh v. Barrington Pacific
Plaintiffs did not need to demonstrate any actual harm for standing to sue under statutory scheme (ICRAA) that established minimum statutory damages aimed at motivating compliance and enforcement. |
Consumer Law |
|
L. Edmon | Jan. 23, 2026 |
|
D085750
|
Mustaqeem v. City of San Diego
By failing to recognize that a city's impoundment ordinance facially conflicted with state sidewalk vending law, trial court erred in denying sidewalk vendor's request for a preliminary injunction. |
Municipal Law |
|
J. Kelety | Jan. 23, 2026 |
|
B338353
|
People v. Grandberry
Trial court did not err in declining to dismiss defendant's prior strikes because Penal Code section 1385(c) applies to enhancements, not prior strikes. |
Criminal Law and Procedure |
|
K. Yegan | Jan. 23, 2026 |
|
A172153
|
Marriage of Starr
Trial court erred in treating amended petition's separation date as a binding judicial admission when opposing party's actions supported it was still a contested issue. |
Civil Procedure, Family Law |
|
J. Goldman | Jan. 23, 2026 |
|
G066061
|
N.D. v. Superior Court (E.F.)
Attorney's unreasonable violations of the Rules of Court and filing of a frivolous writ petition warranted the imposition of $25,000 in sanctions. |
Attorneys |
|
N. Scott | Jan. 22, 2026 |
|
B348279
|
In re Bella L.
Given the breadth of inquiry with other family members regarding possible Native American ancestry, agency's failure to question paternal grandfather did not render inquiry inadequate under Indian Child Welfare Act. |
Dependency, Native American Affairs |
|
B. Hoffstadt | Jan. 22, 2026 |
|
B341773
|
Barrios v. Chraghchian
Statute requiring plaintiffs in derivative suits to post a bond early in litigation did not block a prevailing defendant in derivative action from recovering costs under other rules and statutes. |
Business Law |
|
J. Wiley | Jan. 22, 2026 |
|
B339866
|
R.R. v. C.R.
Trial court abused its discretion in denying ex-husband a domestic violence restraining order based on an erroneous understanding of what constitutes "abuse" under the Domestic Violence Prevention Act. |
Family Law |
|
A. Collins | Jan. 22, 2026 |
|
E086720
|
Harmon v. Superior Court (People)
Public defender representation for postconviction habeas proceedings is discretionary under Government Code section 27706(g). |
Criminal Law and Procedure |
|
F. Menetrez | Jan. 22, 2026 |
|
G064286
|
Californians for Homeownership v. City of La Habra
No additional public hearings were required to approve city's housing element plan when changes were part of the same revision process rather than a new amendment. |
Municipal Law, Real Property |
|
N. Scott | Jan. 21, 2026 |
|
C102901
|
Randolph v. Trustees of the California State University
Civil defendant's failure to object to trial date beyond statutory period for bringing action to trial was not an agreement to extend the deadline, necessitating dismissal once the period expired. |
Civil Procedure |
|
S. Boulware Eurie | Jan. 21, 2026 |
|
E086512
|
People v. Superior Court (Lashelle)
Prosecutor's failure to file a formal misdemeanor complaint within 25 days of defendant's DUI citation did not deprive the trial court of jurisdiction. |
Criminal Law and Procedure |
|
R. Fields | Jan. 21, 2026 |
|
B342355
|
Hu v. XPO Logistics, LLC
Property broker owed no duty to carrier's injured employee because the broker was not a licensed carrier and did not exercise control over the carrier's transport of the cargo. |
Torts |
|
B. Hoffstadt | Jan. 21, 2026 |
|
B324360
|
Modification: Towns v. Hyundai Motor America
Under Song-Beverly Act, only vehicle's buyer--not driver or responsible party--has standing to pursue a claim. |
Consumer Law, Civil Procedure |
|
H. Zukin | Jan. 21, 2026 |
|
24-808
|
Coney Island Auto Parts Unlimited, Inc. v. Burton
Requirement that motions to vacate judgments under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure be filed in a reasonable time applies to motions alleging the judgment is void. |
Civil Procedure |
|
S. Alito | Jan. 21, 2026 |
|
24-482
|
Ellingburg v. U.S.
Because restitution imposed under the Mandatory Victims Restitution Act constitutes criminal punishment, its retroactive application to offenses committed before its enactment violated the Ex Post Facto Clause. |
Criminal Law and Procedure, Constitutional Law |
|
B. Kavanaugh | Jan. 21, 2026 |
|
24-440
|
Berk v. Choy
When state's affidavit-of-merit requirement for medical malpractice actions conflicted with federal rules regulating the same civil procedure, federal rules prevailed. |
Civil Procedure |
|
A. Barrett | Jan. 21, 2026 |
|
25-5557
|
Howell v. Circuit Court of Indiana
Order |
|
Jan. 21, 2026 |