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
In re NFL Sunday Ticket Antitrust Litigation
Plaintiffs' allegations of facts supporting their Sherman Antitrust Act Sections 1 and 2 claims were adequate to state a claim and survive defendants' motion to dismiss. 		Antitrust 9th Aug. 14, 2019
Mejia v. Merchants Building Maintenance
A single PAGA claim seeking recovery of civil penalty under Labor Code Section 558 may not be 'split' so as to require representative employee to arbitrate that aspect of the claim. 		Labor Law 4DCA/1 Aug. 14, 2019
U.S. v. Sainz
The government must expressly invoke defendant's 18 U.S.C. Section 3582(c)(2) waiver to avoid waiving it, and merely claiming it was silent and did not intend to waive waiver was insufficient. 		Criminal Law and Procedure 9th Aug. 13, 2019
Paul G. v. Monterey Peninsula USD
Dismissals and settlement agreements do not satisfy the exhaustion requirement under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. 		Education 9th Aug. 13, 2019
National Association for Gun Rights v. Mangan
Montana's disclosure requirements relating to electioneering communications survived exacting scrutiny under the First Amendment, which does not categorically allow states to require disclosure only with respect to express advocacy. 		Constitutional Law 9th Aug. 13, 2019
Dawson v. NCAA
Under California law and the Fair Labor Standards Act, student-athletes are not considered employees of the National Collegiate Athletic Association and PAC-12 Conference. 		Labor Law 9th Aug. 13, 2019
Young v. Pfeiffer
A successive 28 U.S.C. Section 2254 habeas petition cannot be filed if the defendant fails to show that the Supreme Court intended for the new rule to retroactively apply. 		Criminal Law and Procedure 9th Aug. 13, 2019
Animal Legal Defense Fund v. USDA
The term 'individual' in Freedom of Information Act's expedited process under 5 U.S.C. Section 552 552(a)(6)(E)(v)(I) does not include animals; thus, summary judgment in favor of defendant was proper. 		Administrative Agencies 9th Aug. 13, 2019
Batterton v. Dutra Group
Order 		9th Aug. 13, 2019
In re Masters
Defendant not entitled to habeas corpus relief on his claim that witness testified falsely at his trial because court appointed referee did not believe witness' recantation of trial testimony. 		Criminal Law and Procedure CASC Aug. 13, 2019
People v. Ovieda
Community caretaking exception to Fourth Amendment's prohibition on warrantless searches established by lead opinion of 'People v. Ray' is abolished and officers lacked objective facts justifying warrantless entry. 		Constitutional Law CASC Aug. 13, 2019
White v. Square, Inc.
Standing under Unruh Civil Rights Act claim extends to plaintiff who visited business's website, encountered discriminatory terms, and intended to make use of the business's services. 		Constitutional Law CASC Aug. 13, 2019
O'Brien v. AMBS Diagnostics, LLC
Judgment debtor's 401(k) holding funds transferred from individual retirement accounts was formed to protect funds from creditors, rather than retirement purposes, so they were only partially exempt from levy. 		Civil Procedure 2DCA/2 Aug. 12, 2019
United States v. Lost Creek Trust
Order 		9th Aug. 12, 2019
U.S. v. Jobe
Twenty one day delay did not evince negligence on the part of the special agent, let alone deliberate and culpable misconduct; thus, exclusionary rule did not apply. 		Criminal Law and Procedure 9th Aug. 12, 2019
Livaditis v. Davis
California Supreme Court's denial of habeas relief was supported by reasonable grounds since petitioner's counsel's performance was not deficient and, in any event, did not prejudice the defense. 		Civil Rights 9th Aug. 12, 2019
Janjua v. Neufeld
Because issue of whether appellant was inadmissible on terrorism-related grounds was not raised, contested, and submitted for determination at his asylum proceeding, it was not actually litigated; thus, issue preclusion did not apply. 		Immigration 9th Aug. 12, 2019
Coeur d'Alene Tribe v. Hawks
Tribe's action to enforce the Tribal Court's judgment against nonmember presented a substantial issue of federal law; thus, district court had federal question jurisdiction. 		Native American Affairs 9th Aug. 12, 2019
Riley v. Filson
State's Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b)(6) motion to reopen final judgment was properly denied because no change in Nevada law regarding distinct statutory elements of first-degree murder occurred. 		Criminal Law and Procedure 9th Aug. 12, 2019
Johnson v. Housing Authority of City of Oakland
Housing authority's summary of meeting discussing plaintiff's eviction coupled with the pre-termination notice was sufficient to enable plaintiff to prepare her defense. 		Administrative Agencies 1DCA/4 Aug. 12, 2019
S.C. v. G.S.
Under Family Code Section 3603 and 2692, child support payments may not be modified retroactively and trial courts lack the authority to make such modifications. 		Family Law 6DCA Aug. 12, 2019
Red & White Distribution v. Osteroid Enterprises
Under Civil Code Section 1671(b), a liquidated damages clause will be considered unreasonable and unenforceable if it bears no reasonable relationship to the actual damages. 		Civil Procedure 2DCA/4 Aug. 12, 2019
ClipperJet Inc. v. Tyson
Defendant filed untimely notice of removal, co-defendant filed duplicative notice of removal, and defendant failed to take action for eight months after remand, warranting entry of default and default judgment. 		Civil Procedure 4DCA/3 Aug. 9, 2019
Pina v. County of Los Angeles
When a medical witness' testimony is permitted for the limited purpose of impeachment, any additional contradicting medical opinions presented will be considered prejudicial error. 		Torts 2DCA/4 Aug. 9, 2019
People v. Capers
Witness' refusal to testify did not violate defendant's due process right to present defense under Sixth Amendment because there was no prosecutorial misconduct. 		Criminal Law and Procedure CASC Aug. 9, 2019
Patel v. Facebook
Plaintiffs established Article III Standing because the Illinois Biometric Information Privacy Act protected their concrete privacy interest and alleged violations posed at least material risk of harm to those interests. 		Civil Procedure 9th Aug. 9, 2019
Andrews v. Sirius XM Radio
The Driver's Privacy Protection Act is not violated when information is obtained from a driver's license because driver's licenses are considered individual property, not DMV property. 		Consumer Law 9th Aug. 9, 2019
Ehrman v. Cox Communications
Defendant's jurisdictional allegations, which provided a short and plain statement of the parties' citizenships based on information and belief, satisfied its burden of pleading minimal diversity. 		Civil Procedure 9th Aug. 9, 2019
Avena v. Chappell
Trial counsel's failure to conduct a thorough investigation of defendant's background to present mitigation evidence was constitutionally inadequate and prejudiced defendant by essentially ensuring defendant would be sentenced to death. 		Civil Rights 9th Aug. 9, 2019
Bakalian v. Central Bank of Turkey
In the absence of invalidated extension statute, plaintiffs' claims were barred by ten-year statute of limitations for claims of genocide, war crimes, and crimes against humanity. 		Civil Procedure 9th Aug. 9, 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.