20 results for 'judge:"Richman"'.
[Modified.] J. Richman corrects a reference to the trial court case number with no change in judgment. The trial court lacked substantial and principled reasons to deny an applicant's petition to change her name to Candi Bimbo Doll, a name she has been using for over a decade. Public policy supports name changes and the applicant's preferred name was not chosen to defraud or confuse. It does not contain fighting words, and recent cultural trends contradict the trial court's conclusion that the word "bimbo" is necessarily vulgar, derogatory or offensive. Reversed.
Court: California Courts Of Appeal, Judge: Richman, Filed On: March 15, 2024, Case #: A168463, Categories: Civil Rights
J. Richman holds that the trial court lacked substantial and principled reasons to deny an applicant's petition to change her name to Candi Bimbo Doll, a name she has been using for over a decade. Public policy supports name changes and the applicant's preferred name was not chosen to defraud or confuse. It does not contain fighting words, and recent cultural trends contradict the trial court's conclusion that the word "bimbo" is necessarily vulgar, derogatory or offensive. Reversed.
Court: California Courts Of Appeal, Judge: Richman, Filed On: March 14, 2024, Case #: A168463, Categories: Civil Rights
J. Richman denies the petition for rehearing on the health care professionals' various convictions regarding a multi-million dollar surgery-referral kickback conspiracy. The out-of-network hospital paid surgeons to refer patients, incentivizing the patients by waiving financial responsibility beyond what the surgery would cost in-network. Though the hospital owners say proceeds received from private insurers do not fall within the forfeiture statute because the insurers were not part of the conspiracy, receiving kickbacks for the privately insured patients was still part of the conspiracy. Affirmed.
Court: 5th Circuit, Judge: Richman , Filed On: March 8, 2024, Case #: 21-10292, Categories: Fraud, Conspiracy
J. Richman finds that the trial court erred in denying a gravely disabled person's motions to dismiss conservatorship proceedings. The trial court abused its discretion in finding that good cause existed to continue the trial despite a statutory requirement that proceedings commence within 10 days. But the disabled person failed to show prejudice or that the trial court erroneously concluded that she was gravely disabled. Affirmed.
Court: California Courts Of Appeal, Judge: Richman, Filed On: February 27, 2024, Case #: A167919, Categories: Commitment, Due Process, Competence
J. Richman finds the lower court erroneously dismissed the car renters' collision-related claims. The rental car company's decision to offer various additional insurance policies to the renters for additional payments rendered it an insurer under Colorado law and allows the renters to bring claims for underpayment of benefits following a collision caused by an uninsured motorist. Reversed.
Court: Colorado Court Of Appeals, Judge: Richman, Filed On: February 15, 2024, Case #: 2024COA15, Categories: Insurance, Contract
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. Richman finds that the trial court properly upheld a county decision to treat a tax debtor's garnished Social Security payments as income in calculating her Medi-Cal eligibility. The garnished income, though it never passes through the tax debtor's hands, is "actually available" to meet her needs since the income actually exists instead of being fictional, theoretical, assumed or imputed. Affirmed.
Court: California Courts Of Appeal, Judge: Richman, Filed On: January 31, 2024, Case #: A164775, Categories: Medicaid, Social Security, Tax
J. Richman holds that the trial court should have compelled the arbitration of the damages due on an underinsured motorist claim. The insurance contract did not hide the arbitration clause so the insurer did not waive its right to compel arbitration. The trial court should also have left the merits of the insured's bad faith claims out of its arbitrability analysis. Reversed.
Court: California Courts Of Appeal, Judge: Richman, Filed On: January 11, 2024, Case #: A167666, Categories: Arbitration, Insurance, Damages
J. Richman finds that the trial court properly dismissed a firefighter's negligence action against a city and a city bus driver for injuries he suffered when a bus drove over a firehose he was handling. The firefighter works for the city fire department and cannot argue that he and the bus driver are employed by separate entities, so the workers' compensation exclusivity rule applies to his injuries. Affirmed.
Court: California Courts Of Appeal, Judge: Richman, Filed On: December 12, 2023, Case #: A165231, Categories: Negligence, Workers' Compensation
J. Richman finds the trial court failed to make required findings when it upheld the no-contact provision in defendant's sentence on domestic violence crimes. The provision infringed on his constitutional right to parental association and, therefore, necessitated findings it could not be accomplished by less restrictive means. Although the violent nature of defendant's crimes qualified as compelling circumstances to continue the no-contact provision involving his daughter, the court failed to consider whether remote communications would allow for contact between the parties without jeopardizing the safety of the child. Reversed.
Court: Colorado Court Of Appeals, Judge: Richman, Filed On: December 7, 2023, Case #: 2023COA117, Categories: Constitution, Sentencing, Due Process
J. Richman finds the district court improperly denied the Mexican mother’s request for the return of her children who were born in Mexico but taken to El Paso by the father after the couple split up. Though the father says that returning the children would violate their right to an education and expose them to a risk of harm, the mother’s petition under the Hague Convention does not allow the district court to resolve the question of which parent is best suited to have custody. Reversed and remanded.
Court: 5th Circuit, Judge: Richman, Filed On: October 11, 2023, Case #: 22-50203, Categories: Family Law, International Law, Guardianship
J. Richman finds that the trial court erred in upholding certain redactions from documents that the Oakland Police Department provided to reporters seeking information about the Celeste Guap scandal, in which officers had sex with Guap, who was underaged. Under the Public Records Act, police training and policy recommendations, witness statements about Guap's social-media use and parts of statements she made to investigators should not have been redacted. Also, the Act provision that allows the redaction of the names of police officers who serve as witnesses does not extend to officers who witness police misconduct. Vacated.
Court: California Courts Of Appeal, Judge: Richman, Filed On: September 25, 2023, Case #: A165187, Categories: Civil Rights, Public Record
J. Richman finds that, according to a recent California Supreme Court decision, the trial court erred in denying an employer's motion to compel arbitration of its employees' individual Private Attorneys General Act claims. However, the employees' Act claims for labor law violations suffered by other employees may proceed to trial. Reversed in part.
Court: California Courts Of Appeal, Judge: Richman, Filed On: August 31, 2023, Case #: A165445, Categories: Arbitration, Employment
J. Richman finds that the industrial claims panel properly found the employee's injury was compensable via workers' compensation benefits despite the lack of an explanation for the injury because precedent from the Colorado Supreme Court established such injuries are in the category of "neutral risk" and are compensable in the absence of a pre-existing condition. Although there were no conditions on the floor that led to the employee's knee injury, his unexplained fall occurred during a work activity and, therefore, was compensable via workers' compensation benefits. Affirmed.
Court: Colorado Court Of Appeals, Judge: Richman, Filed On: August 3, 2023, Case #: 2023COA73, Categories: Employment, Evidence, Workers' Compensation
J. Richman finds that a homeowners policy provision requiring policyholders to file any lawsuits within one year of any loss or damage was properly applied to an unfair competition cause of action. Though the complaint seeks injunctive relief and not damages for a breach of contract, the limitation applies because the basis of the unfair competition claim is how the insurer handled the policyholder's claim. The insurer did not waive the limitation when it reopened the claim for review. Affirmed.
Court: California Courts Of Appeal, Judge: Richman, Filed On: July 11, 2023, Case #: A163848, Categories: Civil Procedure, Insurance, Unfair Competition
J. Richman finds that the trial court properly rejected homeowners' property damage insurance claim related to the loss of embryos when a fertility clinic's cryogenic tank failed. The homeowners failed to establish that the embryos suffered physical damage, or that any loss was caused by one of the policy's enumerated perils. Affirmed.
Court: California Courts Of Appeal, Judge: Richman, Filed On: June 30, 2023, Case #: A162893, Categories: Insurance
J. Richman finds that the trial court properly dismissed a student's breach of contract claim over a university's Covid-19 campus closures. The university had the statutory authority to void its obligation for in-person instruction. But her unjust enrichment claims should be allowed to proceed because the university's authority to invoke statute to void the contract does not deprive her of the right to seek reimbursement of the tuition and fees she paid under the contract. Reversed in part.
Court: Colorado Court Of Appeals, Judge: Richman, Filed On: June 29, 2023, Case #: 22CA1140, Categories: Covid-19, Class Action, Contract
J. Richman finds the district court properly denied the preliminary injunction sought by the naturalized U.S. citizen and attorney to prevent border protection agencies from searching his cell phone without warrant. The attorney claims that agents “copied privileged communications between [him] and his [immigration] clients” at least once. The lawyer has demonstrated that agency policies do authorize warrantless searches but has shown no evidence establishing that agents will search his cell phone in the future. He fails to demonstrate a likelihood of irreparable injury absent injunction. Affirmed.
Court: 5th Circuit, Judge: Richman, Filed On: June 19, 2023, Case #: 20-10059, Categories: Civil Rights, Immigration, Injunction
J. Richman finds the trial court improperly convicted defendants for possession with intent to distribute of 100 kilograms or more of marijuana. Defendants, as passengers in a vehicle stopped for an unspecified offense, were questioned by DEA when the drugs were found in the car. They gave the same basic story that they were strangers but crossed the border together and flagged down a random car for a ride. They said there were no drugs in the car at first, but that the driver dropped them off at a certain point, saying he would come back. The car was loaded with drugs when he returned. The jury could not reasonably conclude based on this that either passenger was in possession with intent to distribute. Reversed and vacated.
Court: 5th Circuit, Judge: Richman, Filed On: June 7, 2023, Case #: 21-50642, Categories: Drug Offender, Evidence, Immigration
J. Richman finds the district court properly granted summary judgment to the city in this suit brought by a DWI arrestee claiming false arrest, excessive force, negligence and vicarious liability. The arresting officer responded to a 911 call reporting an intoxicated driver. He observed the vehicle crossing lines and striking a curb before pulling it over to discover the driver with her minor children in the car. Sobriety tests suggested that she was likely impaired, and after the arrest she admitted to taking Xanax and Hydrocodone. Video evidence of the arrest shows that the officers had probable cause. There is no basis for a negligence claim. Because her underlying state law claims were properly dismissed, there is no basis for a vicarious liability claim. Affirmed.
Court: 5th Circuit, Judge: Richman, Filed On: May 23, 2023, Case #: 20-30507, Categories: Civil Rights, Municipal Law, Police Misconduct