812 results for 'court:"California Courts Of Appeal"'.
[Modified.] [Consolidated.] J. Poochigian fixes two typos with no change in judgment. The trial court improperly granted anti-SLAPP motions to a group of doctors and hospital staff who were sued by a doctor who claimed they interfered with his right to provide care to his patients after admission to the hospital. The actions by hospital doctors and staff that form the basis of his claims did not involve protected activity. Also, issue preclusion does not apply since an earlier lawsuit dismissed by the doctor did not result in any judicial admissions. Reversed.
Court: California Courts Of Appeal, Judge: Poochigian, Filed On: April 25, 2024, Case #: F084700, Categories: Anti-slapp, Health Care
J. Miller finds that the trial court properly concluded that a doctor did not have a right to a hearing before his application for privileges at two hospitals was denied. The doctor had a history of unprofessional behavior at other hospitals and was the subject of a disciplinary order and public reprimand by the state medical board. The hospitals' agreement with the doctor's medical group, which established the eligibility requirements, disallowed staff privileges for doctors with such histories, and the hospitals have quasi-legislative authority to establish the requirements. Affirmed.
Court: California Courts Of Appeal, Judge: Miller, Filed On: April 25, 2024, Case #: A166748, Categories: Employment, Due Process, Contract
J. Simons finds that the trial court lacked jurisdiction to order restitution after the end of defendant's probation on a hit-and-run conviction. Where a restitution order is for losses caused by a collision and not for the criminal act of leaving the scene, the order is a condition of probation and jurisdiction may not extend beyond the termination of probation. Reversed.
Court: California Courts Of Appeal, Judge: Simons, Filed On: April 25, 2024, Case #: A167703, Categories: Restitution, Vehicle, Jurisdiction
J. Segal finds that the trial court should have granted an employer's motion to vacate a renewal of judgment for interest on an attorney fee award. Following a reversal that added to a previous attorney fee award in favor of an employee, the employee's attorneys sought interest from the time of the original trial court denial of fees. But because the appellate decision was not a modification, the interest on the fee award began to accrue when the appeals court reversed. Reversed.
Court: California Courts Of Appeal, Judge: Segal, Filed On: April 24, 2024, Case #: B327821, Categories: Civil Procedure, Employment, Attorney Fees
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. Robie finds that the trial court properly rejected a civil service employee's claim that her due process rights were violated when she was denied a Skelly hearing. Skelly hearings are only available upon notice of an adverse employment action, and she chose a voluntary demotion rather than face what she was told would be possible termination. Affirmed.
Court: California Courts Of Appeal, Judge: Robie, Filed On: April 23, 2024, Case #: C097235, Categories: Employment, Due Process
[Consolidated.] J. Collins finds that the trial court should have granted all the special anti-SLAPP motions to strike claims that the idea for the television series "Mixed-ish" was stolen. The making of a television series is protected activity, which satisfied the first element of the anti-SLAPP analysis. And the second element was satisfied by the challenger's failure to demonstrate a probability of success on her contract, breach of confidence, interference and misrepresentation claims. The challenger's work showed similarity to "Mixed-ish," but key elements in "Mixed-ish" appeared in the producers' own previous show, "Black-ish," while the "general theme, tone, characters, relationships, settings, and plots demonstrate that the two series are not substantially similar." Reversed in part.
Court: California Courts Of Appeal, Judge: Collins, Filed On: April 23, 2024, Case #: B316971, Categories: Anti-slapp, Contract
J. Segal finds that the trial court properly denied an employer's motion to arbitrate an employee's Private Attorneys General Act claims. The trial court had the authority to decide the arbitrability of his claims since the arbitration agreement the employee signed did not clearly delegate arbitrability decisions to an arbitrator. And the agreement itself excluded both the employee's individual and representative Act claims. Affirmed.
Court: California Courts Of Appeal, Judge: Segal, Filed On: April 23, 2024, Case #: B328425, Categories: Arbitration, Employment
J. Yegan finds that defendant's bid for resentencing on a provocative act murder conviction failed because it is still a valid theory of murder. The legislature had the opportunity but chose not to eliminate provocative act murder when it eliminated the natural and probable consequences theory of murder. Affirmed.
Court: California Courts Of Appeal, Judge: Yegan, Filed On: April 23, 2024, Case #: B323640, Categories: Murder, Sentencing
J. Smiley finds that the trial court did not exceed its jurisdiction when it entered summary judgment against a bail bond surety. An already extended exoneration period had expired, the bond had been forfeited and the trial court then waited until after it denied defendant's motion to vacate forfeiture to enter summary judgment. Affirmed.
Court: California Courts Of Appeal, Judge: Smiley, Filed On: April 22, 2024, Case #: A166580, Categories: Criminal Procedure, Robbery, Bail
J. Delaney finds that the trial court properly denied defendant's petition for resentencing on a manslaughter conviction. Statutory changes that ended imputed malice theories of murder came after he pleaded guilty, and his plea served as an admission that he directly aided and abetted murder, a still valid theory. Affirmed.
Court: California Courts Of Appeal, Judge: Delaney, Filed On: April 22, 2024, Case #: G062075, Categories: Sentencing, Plea, Manslaughter
[Consolidated.] J. Wiley finds that the trial court erred in denying a motion to amend filed by a company's managing member who alleged his business partner cheated him out of the proceeds of a real estate sale. He may bring his claims on behalf of member entities and pursue his conspiracy claims against the business partner. Reversed in part.
Court: California Courts Of Appeal, Judge: Wiley, Filed On: April 19, 2024, Case #: B314426, Categories: Unfair Competition, Fiduciary Duty, Contract
J. Wiley finds that the trial court properly denied special anti-SLAPP motions on most of a condo resident's defamation claims against his neighbors. The neighbors' emails furthered a personal dispute and did not contribute to a discussion of public issues. They were not sent to the general public, but were confrontational attempts at shaming the condo resident. And homeowners' association debates usually involve private issues, and are not per se connected to public issues. Affirmed.
Court: California Courts Of Appeal, Judge: Wiley, Filed On: April 19, 2024, Case #: B317061, Categories: Anti-slapp, Defamation
J. Wiley finds that the trial court erred in denying an employer's special motion to strike a former employee's malicious prosecution complaint. The employer cannot be sued for malicious proscution because the former employee faced criminal charges for property destruction only after police conducted their own investigation, fully independent of the employer's. Reversed.
Court: California Courts Of Appeal, Judge: Wiley, Filed On: April 18, 2024, Case #: B324368, Categories: Anti-slapp, Malicious Prosecution
J. Gilbert finds that the trial court erred in striking an employee's Private Attorneys General Act complaint. She has standing under the Act to sue on behalf of herself and other employees because she alleged she was an "aggrieved" employee and was deprived of timely meal periods, which made her subject to at least one labor law violation. Reversed.
Court: California Courts Of Appeal, Judge: Gilbert, Filed On: April 18, 2024, Case #: B326759, Categories: Civil Procedure, Employment
[Modified.] J. Streeter makes three changes to a previously published opinion with no change in judgment. The lower court properly denied defendant’s petition for relief. Defendant was convicted of first-degree murder and attempted robbery and sentenced to 50 years to life. He was granted a resentencing hearing after a lower court found he was denied counsel, and though the same errors were repeated during the resentencing hearing, the instant court finds them harmless. Evidence is sufficient to support defendant’s convictions and sentence, along with associated enhancements. Affirmed.
Court: California Courts Of Appeal, Judge: Streeter, Filed On: April 17, 2024, Case #: A166001, Categories: Murder, Sentencing, Self Representation
J. Wiley finds that the trial court properly tossed an employment discrimination complaint because the state employee failed to exhaust his administrative remedies, as required by the Fair Employment and Housing Act. His initial administrative claim cited sex discrimination and retaliation, but did not allege the race discrimination he included in his later lawsuit. Affirmed.
Court: California Courts Of Appeal, Judge: Wiley, Filed On: April 17, 2024, Case #: B323735, Categories: Employment Discrimination
[Modified.] J. Snauffer makes two changes to a previously published opinion with no change in judgment. The trial court lacked jurisdiction to recalculate defendant's maximum term of commitment for a plea of not guilty by reason of insanity to stalking and criminal threat charges. The rule that a trial court is deprived of jurisdiction to recalculate the sentence for a defendant who has begun serving time also applies to a recalculation of the term of commitment for a defendant whose period of commitment has commenced. Reversed.
Court: California Courts Of Appeal, Judge: Snauffer, Filed On: April 17, 2024, Case #: F085699, Categories: Threats, Jurisdiction, Commitment
J. Huffman finds that the trial court properly convicted defendant of second degree murder after he was convicted in an earlier trial for gross vehicular manslaughter while intoxicated for the same incident. Gross vehicular manslaughter while intoxicated is not a lesser included offense of murder, so the second conviction did not violate his double jeopardy protections. Affirmed.
Court: California Courts Of Appeal, Judge: Huffman, Filed On: April 16, 2024, Case #: D081050, Categories: Murder, Double Jeopardy, Dui
J. Bamattre-Manoukian finds that the trial court erroneously held that a county was not required to comply with a city's claim presentation ordinance before it sued the city for reimbursement of sums spent on emergency road repairs. The city ordinance has a claim presentation requirement that applies to all claims that are exempted from the requirement under the Government Claims Act. The city ordinance also expressly states that no lawsuit for claims for money or damages may be filed unless a written claim has first been presented to the city. Vacated.
Court: California Courts Of Appeal, Judge: Bamattre-Manoukian, Filed On: April 16, 2024, Case #: H050881, Categories: Municipal Law
[Modified.] J. Streeter makes three minor modifications and denies a rehearing with no change in judgment. The lower court properly interpreted an inventory claim in this insurance matter, but not the loss of business income. A cannabis business suffered losses after a robbery, and filed a claim with the insurance company for $2.5 million of lost inventory. The inventory was stolen from two vaults, and the business argues it should be two inventory claims with a $600,000 limit for each claim, but the insurance company argues it is one claim with a limit of $600,000. The lower court found the interpretation of a single claim to be correct, and the instant court agrees, but it finds the portion of the claim concerning lost business income may not have been properly calculated, and remands that portion of the matter for further consideration. Reversed in part.
Court: California Courts Of Appeal, Judge: Streeter, Filed On: April 16, 2024, Case #: A167491, Categories: Insurance
J. Petrou finds that the juvenile court properly denied a motion to seal juvenile records. The dismissal of juvenile court petitions after the juvenile's wardship ended did not obligate the juvenile court to seal his records since the underlying adjudications for forcible lewd conduct are ineligible for sealing under statute. Affirmed.
Court: California Courts Of Appeal, Judge: Petrou, Filed On: April 16, 2024, Case #: A168282, Categories: Juvenile Law, Sex Offender
J. Buchanan finds that the trial court properly admitted statements made by a sexual abuse victim to her friends about abuse that occurred years before. The "fresh complaint" doctrine, which rejects complaints unless they are made immediately after alleged abuse, is outdated since child victims often delay their disclosure of abuse. The trial court admitted the statements for the nonhearsay purpose of establishing the nature of her disclosure, and trial courts are encouraged to refer to this practice as the "prior disclosure" doctrine. Also, expert testimony about Child Sexual Abuse Accommodation Syndrome was properly admitted. However, the trial court should have applied presentence conduct credits to defendant's sentence. Reversed in part.
Court: California Courts Of Appeal, Judge: Buchanan, Filed On: April 15, 2024, Case #: D083310, Categories: Evidence, Sentencing, Sex Offender
J. Castillo finds that the trial court properly denied mandamus relief to a local water agency that challenged another local water agency's claim to be the regional groundwater sustainability agency (GSA) under the water code. The challenger failed to show that its powers were impaired by the legislature's express designation of the other agency as the local GSA. By becoming the GSA, the other agency did not violate the code by forming a public corporation within the challenger's jurisdiction. And the other agency complied with all the notice requirements of the water code in announcing its intent to become a GSA. Affirmed.
Court: California Courts Of Appeal, Judge: Castillo, Filed On: April 12, 2024, Case #: D081984, Categories: Water
J. Tucher holds that the trial court must rehear defendant's motion for a new trial on charges of a lewd act upon a child and exhibiting harmful matter to a minor. The ex-wife's declaration that she and the alleged victim had schemed to falsely accuse him was newly discovered evidence. The trial court's analysis discounting the ex-wife's declaration was flawed since the declaration contradicted the strongest evidence against defendant. Vacated.
Court: California Courts Of Appeal, Judge: Tucher, Filed On: April 10, 2024, Case #: A167246, Categories: Evidence, Sex Offender
J. Tucher finds that the trial court abused its discretion in admitting hearsay testimony from an alleged victim's mother in defendant's sexual abuse trial. The statements victim made to her mother did not meet the spontaneous statement exception to the hearsay rule because they were made about events that occurred five years earlier, and came after the victim had reflected on years of molestation and before a final sexual encounter. The convictions for sex offenses over the six years before the victim made a report stand, but the mother's hearsay testimony was the only evidence supporting a count for a lewd act on a child under the age of 14. Reversed in part.
Court: California Courts Of Appeal, Judge: Tucher, Filed On: April 10, 2024, Case #: A165646, Categories: Confrontation, Sex Offender
J. Menetrez finds that the trial court should have granted defendant's petition for compassionate release from a 75-year sentence for first degree murder, as no evidence supported its dangerousness finding. He retains some ability to speak despite rapidly progressing amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) that severely limits his physical capacity and will likely cause his death within a year. But he has never solicited anyone to commit a crime or committed a crime in concert with anyone, and neither his gang affiliations nor lack of remorse mean he poses an unreasonable risk of committing a super strike crime if released. Reversed.
Court: California Courts Of Appeal, Judge: Menetrez, Filed On: April 10, 2024, Case #: E082085, Categories: Murder, Sentencing, Gangs
J. Earl finds that the trial court properly held that statute allows a candidate to simultaneously run in primary elections for both a state assembly seat and a U.S. Congressional seat. The statute that limits a candidate to one race does not apply to all candidates, but only to the independent nomination of candidates subsequent to a primary election.
Court: California Courts Of Appeal, Judge: Earl, Filed On: April 9, 2024, Case #: C100304, Categories: Elections
J. Viramontes finds that the trial court erred in denying defendant's petition for resentencing on attempted murder and manslaughter convictions. The record of conviction, which was based on a plea, does not bar his eligibility for resentencing at the prima facie stage. Neither the plea nor the preliminary hearing record established that he was the actual killer, had the intent to kill, demonstrated actual malice or acted with reckless indifference. Reversed.
Court: California Courts Of Appeal, Judge: Viramontes, Filed On: April 9, 2024, Case #: B324576, Categories: Murder, Sentencing