| Case # | Name | Category | Court | Judge | Published |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
E070042
|
People v. Medrano
Appellant failed by choice or inadvertence to exercise his right to make a record of mitigating youth-related evidence, and remand to allow him to make such a showing was not warranted. |
Criminal Law and Procedure |
|
F. Menetrez | Oct. 8, 2019 |
|
18-1258
|
Enclarity Inc v. Fulton
Order |
|
Oct. 8, 2019 | ||
|
18-7572
|
Webster v. U.S.
Order |
|
Oct. 8, 2019 | ||
|
18-8737
|
Bachiller v. U.S.
Order |
|
Oct. 8, 2019 | ||
|
18-8911
|
Humbert v. U.S.
Order |
|
Oct. 8, 2019 | ||
|
18-9185
|
Martin v. U.S.
Order |
|
Oct. 8, 2019 | ||
|
18-9210
|
Solomon v. U.S.
Order |
|
Oct. 8, 2019 | ||
|
18-9211
|
Escourse-Westbrook v. U.S.
Order |
|
Oct. 8, 2019 | ||
|
18-9234
|
Mendoza v. U.S.
Order |
|
Oct. 8, 2019 | ||
|
18-9244
|
Herrera v. U.S.
Order |
|
Oct. 8, 2019 | ||
|
18-9266
|
Rodriguez v. U.S.
Order |
|
Oct. 8, 2019 | ||
|
18-9302
|
Lin v. U.S.
Order |
|
Oct. 8, 2019 | ||
|
18-9323
|
Duhart v. U.S.
Order |
|
Oct. 8, 2019 | ||
|
18-9425
|
Contreras v. U.S.
Order |
|
Oct. 8, 2019 | ||
|
18-9444
|
Greer v. U.S.
Order |
|
Oct. 8, 2019 | ||
|
18-9589
|
Gilbert v. U.S.
Order |
|
Oct. 8, 2019 | ||
|
18-9707
|
Cook v. U.S.
Order |
|
Oct. 8, 2019 | ||
|
18-9726
|
Hale v. U.S.
Order |
|
Oct. 8, 2019 | ||
|
19-5196
|
Robinson v. U.S.
Order |
|
Oct. 8, 2019 | ||
|
19-5260
|
Jackson v. U.S.
Order |
|
Oct. 8, 2019 | ||
|
19-5270
|
McCormick v. U.S.
Order |
|
Oct. 8, 2019 | ||
|
19-5330
|
Parks v. U.S.
Order |
|
Oct. 8, 2019 | ||
|
19-70
|
Householder v. Philip Randolph Inst.
Order |
|
Oct. 8, 2019 | ||
|
19-110
|
Chabot v. Philip Randolph Inst.
Order |
|
Oct. 8, 2019 | ||
|
17-17318
|
Flynt v. Shimazu
Assuming California Business & Professions Code Sections 19858 and 19858.5 violated Dormant Commerce Clause, plaintiffs demonstrated continuing violation; thus, statute of limitations period begins anew with each new injury. |
Civil Procedure |
|
D. O'Scannlain | Oct. 8, 2019 |
|
17-30227
|
Amended Opinion: U.S. v. Green
Sentencing court erred by concluding that it could not first hear defendant's allocution before determining whether reduction for acceptance of responsibility was warranted under Sentencing Guidelines. |
Criminal Law and Procedure |
|
M. Berzon | Oct. 8, 2019 |
|
B291636
|
Abir Cohen Treyzon Salo, LLP v. Lahiji
Reviews posted on an Internet website meet the definition of 'protected activity' under anti-SLAPP law, even if the reviewer denies that she made the review. |
Anti-SLAPP |
|
B. Hoffstadt | Oct. 7, 2019 |
|
B291068
|
Crooks v. Housing Authority of the City of L.A.
Providing false information about marital status is a material violation of a family's reporting obligations and is grounds for termination from the federally funded Section 8 program. |
Government |
|
E. Lui | Oct. 7, 2019 |
|
B282133
|
County of L.A. v. Civil Service Com. of the County of L.A.
Sheriff's Deputy's failure to report two incidents of abuse of an inmate constituted inexcusable neglect of duties and his subsequent lies harmed the public service, making discharge the proper remedy. |
Government |
|
V. Chaney | Oct. 7, 2019 |
|
B293382
|
In re J.M.
Court errs when it dismisses petition for lack of sufficient evidence of current risk of harm when reason why such evidence is lacking is because parent absconded with children. |
Juveniles |
|
L. Baker | Oct. 7, 2019 |