11 results for 'judge:"Bendix"'.
J. Bendix finds that the trial court properly ordered the production of entries in the calendar of the governor's former senior energy advisor showing meetings with utilities, unions and the Public Utilities Commission. The deliberative process privilege does not apply because the public records request asked simply whether the meetings took place, not for information about the substance of the meetings. Also, the public has a substantial interest in knowing the level of interaction between the former advisor, Alice Reynolds, and the commission she now presides over as president.
Court: California Courts Of Appeal, Judge: Bendix, Filed On: April 5, 2024, Case #: B330847, Categories: Public Record, Privilege
J. Bendix finds the trial court lacked jurisdiction to order a child's removal from her parents. Evidence that parents had allowed her to cross into the U.S. unaccompanied did not support a finding that she faced any future risk. She was no longer in the custody of an uncle who had abused her in the U.S., her father was now in the U.S., and a dispute between her father and her mother, who was still in Honduras, about who should care for her was not a basis for jurisdiction. Reversed.
Court: California Courts Of Appeal, Judge: Bendix, Filed On: March 5, 2024, Case #: B329192, Categories: Family Law, Jurisdiction
[Modified.] J. Bendix alters three paragraphs and denies a rehearing with no change in judgment. The trial court erred in dismissing a city's claim that its insurer should have provided indemnification in an underlying employment litigation. The trial court held that the Insurance Code categorically bars coverage in retaliation cases since an insured that retaliates against an employee causes its own loss through a willful act. But not all acts of discipline against employees engaged in protected conduct are willful acts within the meaning of the Insurance Code. Here, the city may have disciplined its employees for refusing to carry out a policy that the city reasonably believed was lawful. Reversed in part.
Court: California Courts Of Appeal, Judge: Bendix, Filed On: December 26, 2023, Case #: B321450, Categories: Employment, Insurance
J. Bendix finds that the trial court erred in dismissing a city's claim that its insurer should have provided indemnification in an underlying employment litigation. The trial court held that the Insurance Code categorically bars coverage in retaliation cases since an insured that retaliates against an employee causes its own loss through a willful act. But not all acts of discipline against employees engaged in protected conduct are willful acts within the meaning of the Insurance Code. Here, the city may have disciplined its employees for refusing to carry out a policy that the city reasonably believed was lawful. Reversed in part.
Court: California Courts Of Appeal, Judge: Bendix, Filed On: December 6, 2023, Case #: B321450, Categories: Employment, Insurance
J. Bendix finds that the trial court properly dismissed a taxpayer's complaint for a refund. Proposition 39, which was enacted in 2012 to promote clean energy jobs, did not violate the single-subject rule for ballot initiatives. The measure's provisions were directly related to funding clean energy job creation, and the differential burden on businesses was within the scope of its purpose. Affirmed.
Court: California Courts Of Appeal, Judge: Bendix, Filed On: October 23, 2023, Case #: B318787, Categories: Elections, Tax
Want access to unlimited case records and advanced research tools? Create your free CasePortal account now. No credit card required to register.
Try CasePortal for Free
J. Bendix finds that the trial court properly denied defendant's petition for resentencing on an attempted murder conviction because statutory changes were not applicable. However, his conviction for the murder of his robbery accomplice under the provocative act doctrine may have improperly been based on imputed malice stemming solely from his participation in the robbery and must be revisited for an evidentiary hearing. Reversed in part.
Court: California Courts Of Appeal, Judge: Bendix, Filed On: September 27, 2023, Case #: B323940, Categories: Murder, Robbery, Sentencing
J. Bendix finds that the trial court must revisit claims by former sheriff's deputies that they are entitled to reinstatement under a settlement agreement made with sheriff's department personnel. Though the county charter does not give the county counsel exclusive authority over the administrative appeals of disciplinary actions against county employees, the former deputies failed to show the sheriff's department can enter agreements that bind the county to settlements of such appeals. But the former deputies are entitled to amend their pleading to support their claim that the sheriff's department has the authority to settle civil service commission appeals. Reversed.
Court: California Courts Of Appeal, Judge: Bendix, Filed On: August 18, 2023, Case #: B316067, Categories: Administrative Law, Employment, Settlements
[Modified.] [Consolidated.] J. Bendix modifies a previously published opinion with no change in judgment and denies a petition for rehearing. The trial court misapplied the interim adverse judgment rule when it granted a landlord's anti-SLAPP motion, which the landlord filed after its tenant prevailed in an unlawful detainer action and filed a malicious prosecution complaint against the landlord. The trial court categorized the unlawful detainer court's sua sponte statements as interim adverse judgments, but only actual judgments and rulings on dispositive motions can serve as the bases for the application of the interim adverse judgment rule. Reversed.
Court: California Courts Of Appeal, Judge: Bendix, Filed On: July 18, 2023, Case #: B321087, Categories: Anti-slapp, Landlord Tenant, Malicious Prosecution
J. Bendix finds that the trial court misapplied the interim adverse judgment rule when it granted a landlord's anti-SLAPP motion, which the landlord filed after its tenant prevailed in an unlawful detainer action and filed a malicious prosecution complaint against the landlord. The trial court categorized the unlawful detainer court's sua sponte statements as interim adverse judgments, but only actual judgments and rulings on dispositive motions can serve as the bases for the application of the interim adverse judgment rule. Reversed.
Court: California Courts Of Appeal, Judge: Bendix, Filed On: June 28, 2023, Case #: B321087, Categories: Anti-slapp, Landlord Tenant, Malicious Prosecution
[Consolidated.][Modified.] J. Bendix modifies a previously published opinion to clarify the extent of a regional water quality board's authority to regulate the unreasonable use of water. The trial court properly held that a regional water quality board lacked the authority to compel publicly-owned treatment facilities to recycle more of the wastewater they discharge into the Los Angeles River. The regional board is tasked with ensuring water quality, not reasonable use. But the trial court erred in directing the state water quality board to evaluate whether the discharges were reasonable and to provide the trial court with facts it could review. The state board has wide discretion over how it evaluates whether water use is reasonable, and the trial court erred in denying its demurrer. Reversed in part.
Court: California Courts Of Appeal, Judge: Bendix, Filed On: June 2, 2023, Case #: B309151, Categories: Environment, Water
J. Bendix grants Leslie Van Houten's habeas petition and reinstates a 2020 decision by the parole board granting her parole. Governor Newsom reversed the board's decision to grant parole to Van Houten, who is serving life sentences for the Charles Manson-inspired murders of Rosemary and Leno La Bianca in 1969. Newsom's reversal was based on "unsupported intuition" and an unfounded conclusion that hidden factors make her a current danger who is unsuitable for parole.
Court: California Courts Of Appeal, Judge: Bendix, Filed On: May 30, 2023, Case #: B320098, Categories: Habeas, Murder