| Case # | Name | Category | Court | Judge | Published |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
A157529
|
People v. Richardson
Trial court acted in excess of its authority when it allowed defendant to plead no contest to human trafficking of minor, despite victim being 27 years old. |
Criminal Law and Procedure |
|
T. Jackson | Jun. 11, 2021 |
|
A157633
|
People v. Bankers Insurance Co.
Trial court's right to enter summary judgment against surety expired because it did not enter it before 90 day period, pursuant to Penal Code Section 1306(c). |
Criminal Law and Procedure |
|
M. Miller | Jun. 11, 2021 |
|
A162060
|
J.J. v. Superior Court (People)
Minor's continued confinement after juvenile court found that minor had not attained competence at end of 12-month statutory remediation period violated Welfare and Institutions Code Section 709. |
Juveniles |
|
H. Needham | Jun. 10, 2021 |
|
F078400
|
Moreno v. Bassi
When Labor Code Section 1194 and Code of Civil Procedure Section 1031 overlap, Labor Code Section 1194 controls because it is more specific and its attorney fees provision is more recently enacted. |
statutory_interpretation |
|
D. Franson | Jun. 10, 2021 |
|
G058363
|
People v. Soriano
Gang expert's opinion that defendant's crime of carrying concealed knife was for benefit of, or in association with, gang was speculative. |
Criminal Law and Procedure |
|
E. Moore | Jun. 10, 2021 |
|
G058873
|
Sales v. City of Tustin
Trial court incorrectly found that 30-day safe harbor to refile state law claims afforded by 28 U.S.C. Section 1367(d) began to run from date of district court's judgment, rather than after appeal. |
Civil Procedure |
|
T. Goethals | Jun. 10, 2021 |
|
D077409
|
Severin Mobile Towing, Inc. v. JPMorgan Chase
Bank defendant could not assert California Uniform Commercial Code Section 3405 defense because it did not address manner in which employee fraudulently indorsed employer's checks. |
Torts |
|
J. Haller | Jun. 10, 2021 |
|
19-30202
|
U.S. v. Harris
Because there was no evidence that defendant exercised control over codefendant, district court abused its discretion in applying leadership enhancement under U.S.S.G. Section 3B1.1(c). |
Criminal Law and Procedure |
|
M. McKeown | Jun. 10, 2021 |
|
18-15498
|
Ford v. Peery
Federal court was required to give deference to state court findings under Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act, despite prosecutor's misstatement of law. |
Criminal Law and Procedure |
|
W. Fletcher | Jun. 9, 2021 |
|
15-72406
|
Lorenzo Lopez v. Garland
Order |
|
Jun. 9, 2021 | ||
|
16-17197
|
Federal Trade Commission v. AMG Capital Management
Order |
|
Jun. 9, 2021 | ||
|
D077652
|
Modification: San Diegans for Open Government v. Fonseca
Plaintiff lacked standing because it failed to establish that it, or its member who qualified as 'resident,' paid tax that funded local agency one year prior to commencement of action. |
Civil Procedure |
|
P. Benke | Jun. 9, 2021 |
|
20-896
|
Graham v. Barnette
Order |
|
Jun. 8, 2021 | ||
|
20-828
|
FBI v. Fazaga
Order |
|
Jun. 8, 2021 | ||
|
20-315
|
Sanchez v. Mayorkas
Temporary Protected Status recipient who entered United States unlawfully is not eligible under 8 U.S.C. Section 1255 for Lawful Permanent Resident status. |
Immigration |
|
E. Kagan | Jun. 8, 2021 |
|
18-35573
|
Setty v. Shrinivas Sugandhalaya LLP
Order |
|
Jun. 8, 2021 | ||
|
F080431
|
People v. Accredited Surety & Casualty Company, Inc.
Government carried its burden of showing amount of forfeiture was not excessive under Eighth Amendment. |
Criminal Law and Procedure |
|
D. Franson | Jun. 8, 2021 |
|
E074210
|
Rubin v. Ross
Judgment creditors were not barred from seeking renewal of judgment because debtor's bankruptcy stay did not prohibit renewal under Code of Civil Procedure Section 683.210. |
Bankruptcy |
|
R. Fields | Jun. 8, 2021 |
|
B298388
|
People v. Casillas
Evidence of defendant's immigration status and two prior deportations was admissible to prove motive for attempted murder of police officer. |
Criminal Law and Procedure |
|
R. Federman | Jun. 8, 2021 |
|
20-928
|
National Coalition for Men v. Selective Service System
Order |
|
Jun. 8, 2021 | ||
|
20-55039
|
Amended Opinion: Salisbury v. City of Santa Monica
Discrimination claims under Fair Housing Amendments Act only apply in cases involving a 'sale' or 'rental' of a dwelling to a buyer or tenant. |
Civil Rights |
|
C. Bea | Jun. 8, 2021 |
|
19-56289
|
Wong v. Flynn-Kerper
Defensive use of equitable estoppel is barred when estopping plaintiff would contradict Employee Retirement Income Security Act plan's express terms. |
Remedies |
|
M. Bennett | Jun. 8, 2021 |
|
B304678
|
People v. American Surety Company
Court may continue criminal proceedings without forfeiting bail if court has reason to believe that sufficient excuse may exist for failure to appear. |
Criminal Law and Procedure |
|
M. Tangeman | Jun. 8, 2021 |
|
D077064
|
Perry v. City of San Diego
Trial court properly dismissed homeowners' claims because City's Waste Management Regulation was within the scope of authority conferred upon it by Legislature. |
statutory_interpretation |
|
J. McConnell | Jun. 8, 2021 |
|
C089676
|
People v. Brewer
Based on defendant's serious and numerous offenses, and his status as recidivist, his sentence of 63 years was not grossly disproportionate, even if he is developmentally disabled. |
Criminal Law and Procedure |
|
W. Murray | Jun. 8, 2021 |
|
A158793
|
Gateway Bank, F.S.B. v. Metaxas
Any decision to mitigate damages under special benefit doctrine is to the extent that it equitable; thus, defendant's conduct dictated against exercise of equitable discretion in her favor. |
Remedies |
|
J. Richman | Jun. 7, 2021 |
|
B307235
|
Brighton Collectibles, LLC v. Hockey
Trial court's order granting plaintiff's anti-SLAPP motion to strike defendant's cross-claim for fraud was vacated because defendant showed probability of prevailing on that claim. |
Anti-SLAPP |
|
M. Tangeman | Jun. 7, 2021 |
|
A160669
|
Marriage of F.M. & M.M.
Trial court erred in refusing to consider evidence of father's alleged abuse after temporary restraining order was issued because it was relevant to mother's domestic violence restraining order request. |
Family Law |
|
G. Sanchez | Jun. 7, 2021 |
|
19-72744
|
Alam v. Garland
Order |
|
Jun. 7, 2021 | ||
|
19-56389
|
Webb v. Trader Joe's
Plaintiff's class action was expressly preempted because her state law claims would impose additional requirements that are not equivalent to federal Poultry Products Inspection Act. |
Constitutional Law |
|
L. VanDyke | Jun. 7, 2021 |