14 results for 'judge:"Grimes"'.
J. Grimes finds the lower court properly dismissed a special motion to strike filed by a church deacon and his wife after a donor donated over $1 million to an organization run by the wife, after a sermon. The donation was to help purchase a car and a home for a destitute family, with any leftover funds to be returned to the donor. The donor discovered that the house and car were purchased in the organization’s name, not that of the family in need. The donor filed suit alleging he was solicited for the funds which were used fraudulently to benefit the organization, not the family he believed he was helping. The deacon and his wife deny the claim, alleging the conversations with the donor were public in nature and about the family’s needs, and protected as they were part of a sermon and protected speech. The lower court disagreed, as the discussions were specific in nature and the issue was not so much about where the speech or conversation occurred, but rather about the alleged misconduct perpetrated by the deacon and his wife after the sermon. Affirmed.
Court: California Courts Of Appeal, Judge: Grimes, Filed On: March 29, 2024, Case #: B327668, Categories: Fraud, Fiduciary Duty, Contract
[Modified.] J. Grimes deletes one footnote with no change in judgment. The trial court properly denied defendant's motion to suppress a firearm, ammunition and methamphetamine that police found in his car during a Utah traffic stop, as well as statements he made to an undercover officer in jail. The traffic stop was not unduly prolonged and he consented to the search. Voluntary statements to the officer posing as a fellow inmate came after he invoked his Miranda rights but were not made in a coercive atmosphere dominated by police. Affirmed.
Court: California Courts Of Appeal, Judge: Grimes, Filed On: March 12, 2024, Case #: B317938, Categories: Miranda, Murder, Search
J. Grimes finds the trial court properly denied defendant's motion to suppress a firearm, ammunition and methamphetamine that police found in his car during a Utah traffic stop, as well as statements he made to an undercover officer in jail. The traffic stop was not unduly prolonged and he consented to the search. Voluntary statements to the officer posing as a fellow inmate came after he invoked his Miranda rights but were not made in a coercive atmosphere dominated by police. Affirmed.
Court: California Courts Of Appeal, Judge: Grimes, Filed On: March 7, 2024, Case #: B317938, Categories: Miranda, Murder, Search
J. Grimes finds that the trial court properly granted a judgment notwithstanding of the verdict to landlords after a jury found they were partially responsible for an attack by their tenant's pit bull dogs. No direct or circumstantial evidence was presented to show that they knew their tenant's dogs were dangerous. Affirmed.
Court: California Courts Of Appeal, Judge: Grimes, Filed On: February 9, 2024, Case #: B324831, Categories: Evidence, Negligence
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. Grimes finds that the trial court should have awarded all the attorney fees requested by a law firm that prevailed on an anti-SLAPP motion. The motion was filed in response to a professor's complaint alleging the firm had conducted a biased investigation of the professor's underlying harassment claims against her university colleagues. The professor failed to show that any exceptions to the anti-SLAPP statute applied, nor did she demonstrate a probability of success on the merits. Reversed in part.
Court: California Courts Of Appeal, Judge: Grimes, Filed On: October 20, 2023, Case #: B312337, Categories: Anti-slapp, Attorney Fees
J. Grimes holds that the trial court properly denied an anti-SLAPP motion to strike a contract action over the development and production of the television show Bling Empire. Defendants filing the motion did not demonstrate a functional relationship between their decision not to hire or pay an individual as an executive producer and the furtherance of free speech in connection with public interest in the subject of the show. Affirmed.
Court: California Courts Of Appeal, Judge: Grimes, Filed On: September 13, 2023, Case #: B326887, Categories: Anti-slapp, Contract
[Consolidated.] J. Grimes holds that the trial court improperly found that Michael Jackson’s production companies did not have an affirmative duty to protect children from his sexual abuse because his complete control of the companies left other employees with no duty to protect children in their care. The appeals court concludes that “a corporation that facilitates the sexual abuse of children by one of its employees is not excused from an affirmative duty to protect those children merely because it is solely owned by the perpetrator of the abuse.” Reversed.
Court: California Courts Of Appeal, Judge: Grimes, Filed On: August 18, 2023, Case #: B309450, Categories: Tort
J. Grimes finds that the trial court properly interpreted statute to conclude that a conservator cannot require an insurer to undertake an emergency mental health assessment of an insured conservatee. The assessment process may only be initiated by peace officers and certain designated professionals, and an assessment is not triggered until the conservatee is in custody or under medical care for an emergency medical condition. Affirmed.
Court: California Courts Of Appeal, Judge: Grimes, Filed On: August 18, 2023, Case #: B318650, Categories: Commitment
J. Grimes finds the trial court improperly entered a default judgment of over $700,000 against the bottled water company for breach of contract, fraud and conversion, issuing a writ of execution to obtain it from the company's bank account. The company's chief legal officer admits that when he learned a summons and complaint had been filed, that he did not know if or how service had been completed and did not inquire or take any action. The company filed a motion to set aside and vacate the judgment, and the trial court denied the motion, giving no reason. The mandatory provision requires the court to vacate a default judgment if the application is timely and properly filed. The motion to vacate was timely and proper, and the default was not caused by the attorney's neglect. Reversed.
Court: California Courts Of Appeal, Judge: Grimes , Filed On: July 28, 2023, Case #: B314900, Categories: Due Process, Contract
J. Grimes finds the trial court properly granted a hospital’s motion for summary judgment in this wrongful termination suit. The former employee, without obtaining a medically recognized reason for exemption, refused to get a flu vaccine as a condition of continued employment. Though the hospital views the former employee as “immunocompromised,” there is no indication that it considered this to be a “disabled” status limiting her ability to work or get vaccinated. The vaccine policy applied to all employees except those with a qualifying religious or medical exemption, which the employee did not have. Her immunocompromised status served only to reinforce the idea that she was not disabled in such a way that her health history restricted her from getting the vaccine. Affirmed.
Court: California Courts Of Appeal, Judge: Grimes, Filed On: May 19, 2023, Case #: B297864, Categories: Health Care, Employment Discrimination