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.
Read Today's Digital Edition
Place Your Legal Notices
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
Floyd v. Filson
Petitioner's constitutional rights were not violated by admission of victim's mother's testimony about her son's difficult life and previous experiences with violent crime because testimony did not unduly prejudice petitioner. 		Criminal Law and Procedure 9th Oct. 14, 2019
Weber v. Allergan, Inc.
Plaintiff failed to show that defendant violated a Food and Drug Administration requirement; thus, plaintiff's claim was preempted by the Medical Device Amendments. 		Constitutional Law 9th Oct. 14, 2019
People v. Winn
Admission of photograph of victim while alive did not prejudice defendant, nor did trial court's failure to question defendant's counsel after defendant alleged counsel did not consult with him regarding potentially testifying. 		Criminal Law and Procedure 6DCA Oct. 11, 2019
Greene v. California Coastal Commission
Under 'Sinaiko v. Superior Court,' general objections will not satisfy the requirement that all administrative remedies must be exhausted before the court must act. 		Real Property 2DCA/5 Oct. 11, 2019
Ferra v. Loews Hollywood Hotel
'Regular rate of compensation' for calculating meal or rest break premium payments is not synonymous with 'regular rate of pay' for calculating overtime premium payments. 		Labor Law 2DCA/3 Oct. 11, 2019
Rivera v. Kent
Order 		1DCA/4 Oct. 11, 2019
National Resources Defense Council Inc. v. Perry
Department of Energy regulation known as 'error-correction rule' imposed upon Department duty to publish energy conservation standards in Federal Register, and its refusal to do so violated the rule. 		Administrative Agencies 9th Oct. 11, 2019
Kim v. U.S.
When tortfeasors have adopted a technical policy to evaluate the hazards caused by trees, the discretionary function of the Federal Tort Claims Act may not apply to dismiss the case. 		Torts 9th Oct. 11, 2019
California Insurance Guarantee Assoc. v. Azar
California Insurance Guarantee Association, not a primary plan under Medicare regulations, had no obligation to reimburse the Center for Medicare Services for conditional payments made on behalf of workers' compensation insureds. 		Insurance 9th Oct. 11, 2019
Target Corporation v. Golden State Ins. Co. Limited
Insurance company was not required to defend retailer against customer's lawsuit because there was no 'minimal causal connection' between the product distributed by its insured and customer's injury. 		Insurance 2DCA/6 Oct. 11, 2019
Modification: People v. Mejia
True finding of premeditated and deliberation as an aider and abettor cannot be based on the natural and probable consequences doctrine, so that finding must be vacated. 		Criminal Law and Procedure 4DCA/3 Oct. 10, 2019
Brown v. USA Taekwondo
Organization had special relationship with coach because organization implemented policies and procedures to protect athletes from sexual abuse by coaches, and organization barred coach from coaching athletes for violations of policies. 		Torts 2DCA/7 Oct. 10, 2019
Gonzales v. San Gabriel Transit
Remand was necessary for the trial court to apply the ABC test adopted in 'Dynamex Operations West, Inc. v. Superior Court' while plaintiff's appeal was pending. 		Labor Law 2DCA/4 Oct. 10, 2019
Henderson v. Equilon Enterprises
Only an employer can be liable for claims of inadequate compensation. A Multi-Site Operator Agreement is insufficient to prove that an employer-employee relationship exists on a joint employer liability theory. 		Employment Law 1DCA/1 Oct. 10, 2019
U.S. v. Valle
Government could not establish non-citizen's continuous presence in United States since alleged time of reentry without submitting any direct evidence of where non-citizen was for over a decade. 		Criminal Law and Procedure 9th Oct. 10, 2019
In re O.C.
Welfare and Institutions Code Section 781, not Section 786, applied to sealing petition, and the trial court properly denied the petition due to petitioner's felony convictions. 		Criminal Law and Procedure 4DCA/2 Oct. 10, 2019
People v. Merchant
Under the forfeiture-by-wrongdoing exception, a defendant's Sixth Amendment right to confront an adverse witness is not violated if the defendant coerced a witness or victim from testifying at trial. 		Criminal Law and Procedure 4DCA/1 Oct. 10, 2019
Modification: People v. Hall
Petitioner's arrest and probation reports, although hearsay, were sufficiently reliable under the circumstances to support their admissibility in determining whether petitioner was eligible for relief under Proposition 64. 		Evidence 2DCA/6 Oct. 10, 2019
McHugh v. Protective Life Insurance
Insurance Code Sections 10113.71 and 10113.72 only applied to term life insurance policies issued or delivered after January 1, 2013, so they could not apply to the relevant policy as appellants claimed. 		Insurance 4DCA/1 Oct. 10, 2019
Modification: People v. Mejia
True finding of premeditated and deliberation as an aider and abettor cannot be based on the natural and probable consequences doctrine, so that finding must be vacated. 		Criminal Law and Procedure 4DCA/3 Oct. 10, 2019
Modification: Cheema v. L.S. Trucking, Inc.
Under Penal Code Section 3287, prejudgment interest is appropriate where damages are certain or capable of being made certain by calculation if the defendant actually knows the damage amount. 		Civil Procedure 1DCA/4 Oct. 9, 2019
Maacama Watershed Alliance v. County of Sonoma
Opinions of local residents, based largely on views of different structure, did not constitute substantial evidence that winery will have a significant aesthetic impact; thus, judgment was affirmed. 		Environmental Law 1DCA/4 Oct. 9, 2019
Sprengel v. Zbylut
In determining whether an attorney entered into an 'implied' attorney-client relationship to represent the interests of the individual partners of an entity a court must assess the totality of circumstances. 		Attorneys 2DCA/7 Oct. 9, 2019
Supershuttle International Inc. v. Labor & Workforce Development Agency
Defendants' anti-SLAPP motion failed because plaintiff's allegations did not arise from protected activity, but rather from the Labor Commissioner's intended act of refusing to recognize a superior court judgment. 		Anti-SLAPP 2DCA/8 Oct. 9, 2019
Estate of Holdaway
Plaintiff's creditor's claim and complaint were both timely filed, and although plaintiff's complaint was uncertain in some respects, plaintiff should have the opportunity to plead around those uncertainties. 		Civil Procedure 4DCA/2 Oct. 9, 2019
Bedrosian v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue
Challenge to timeliness of Final Partnership Administrative Adjustment must be raised in the partnership-level proceeding itself, and failure to do so results in forfeiture of the argument. 		Tax 9th Oct. 9, 2019
Amended Opinion: Zabriskie v. Federal National Mortgage Association
A seller of software to a company that uses the software product to process credit report information is not a consumer reporting agency because it is not "assembling or evaluating" any information. 		Consumer Law 9th Oct. 9, 2019
Ray v. County of Los Angeles
Order 		9th Oct. 9, 2019
Myles v. Pennymac Loan Services
It is not enough for a homeowner to allege a mortgage assignment was voidable. The homeowner must provide facts supporting why the assignment is void as a matter of law. 		Real Property 2DCA/8 Oct. 9, 2019
Barajas v. Appellate Division
Application of exclusionary rule at a probable cause hearing under Penal Code Section 991 was not required; Section 1538.5 is the Legislature's codification of the exclusionary rule. 		Criminal Law and Procedure 2DCA/1 Oct. 8, 2019
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.