California Case Law: June 2009 Archives
California Case Law - The FindLaw California Supreme Court and Courts of Appeal Opinion Summaries Blog

June 2009 Archives

Roberts v. County of Los Angeles, No. B208828

In a negligence action against a public-entity health-care provider, trial court judgment is affirmed where: 1) plaintiffs must comply with both the six-month statute of limitations in the Government Claims Act and the three-year statute in the Medical Injury Compensation Reform Act (MICRA) when bringing actions for medical negligence against public entities where the latter deadline is the outside date by which plaintiffs must file their suits against public-entity health-care providers; and 2) plaintiff's complaint was untimely filed despite being timely under the Act, as it was filed more than a year after the expiration of the three-year date in MICRA.    

Read Roberts v. County of Los Angeles, No. B208828 in PDF

Read Roberts v. County of Los Angeles, No. B208828 in HTML

Appellate Information
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, John P. Farrell, Judge. Affirmed.
SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION THREE
Filed June 29, 2009

Judges
Before ALDRICH, J., CROSKEY, Acting P.J., KITCHING, J
Opinion ALDRICH, J.   

Counsel
For Plaintiff: Law Offices of Sean M. Burke and Sean M. Burke.
For Defendant: Law Offices of David J. Weiss, David J. Weiss and Peter M. Bollinger; Pollak, Vida & Fisher and Daniel P. Barer.

Owen v. Macy's, Inc., No. B207719

Trial court judgment holding that plaintiff was not unlawfully denied vacation pay when her employment ended is affirmed where: 1) the express written company policy forewarned new employees that their compensation package did not include paid vacation during their initial employment; and thus 2) plaintiff cannot claim any right to vested vacation during the initial employment because she knew in advance that she would not earn or vest vacation pay during this period.    

Read Owen v. Macy's, Inc., No. B207719 in PDF

Read Owen v. Macy's, Inc., No. B207719 in HTML

Appellate Information
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County. Peter Lichtman, Judge. Affirmed.
SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION TWO
Filed June 29, 2009

Judges
Before BOREN, P.J., DOI TODD, J., CHAVEZ, J.
Opinion by BOREN, P.J.   

Counsel
For Plaintiff: Clark & Markham, David R. Markham, James M. Treglio; United Employees Law Group, Walter Haines.
For Defendant: Law Offices of Julia Azrael, John S. Curtis; Macy's, Inc., David E. Martin.

Vigilant Ins. Co. v. Chiu, No. B209550

Trial court judgment in favor of plaintiff for damages, interest, and costs related to defendant's theft of property is affirmed where a criminal restitution order under Penal Code sec. 1202.4 in favor of a victim of a crime does not preclude the victim or the victim's assignee from pursuing a separate civil action for restitution based on the same facts from which the criminal conviction arose.    

Read Vigilant Ins. Co. v. Chiu, No. B209550 in PDF

Read Vigilant Ins. Co. v. Chiu, No. B209550 in HTML

Appellate Information
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, R. Bruce Minto, Judge. Affirmed.
SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION THREE
Filed June 29, 2009

Judges
Before CROSKEY, J., KLEIN, P.J., ALDRICH, J.
Opinion by CROSKEY, J.   

Counsel
For Plaintiff: Anderson, McPharlin & Conners, David T. DiBiase and Joseph P. Tabrisky.
For Defendant: Megan A. Richmond.

Sanders Construction Co., Inc., v. Cerda, No. E047501

In an action for wages, interest, and waiting-time penalties, trial court judgment is affirmed where under Labor Code sec. 2750.5 the general contractor may be held liable for the unpaid wages of workers hired by an unlicensed subcontractor, and thus the six claimants are not prohibited from suing for their wages.    

Read Sanders Construction Co., Inc., v. Cerda, No. E047501 in PDF

Read Sanders Construction Co., Inc., v. Cerda, No. E047501 in HTML

Appellate Information
APPEAL from the Superior Court of San Bernardino County. Thomas S. Garza, Judge. Affirmed.
FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION TWO
Filed June 29, 2009

Judges
Before Gaut J., McKinster Acting P.J., King J.
Opinion by Gaut J.   

Counsel
For Plaintiff: Law Offices of Caryn Sanders and Caryn Brottman Sanders.
For Defendant: Law Offices of Jerry D. Underwood and Jerry D. Underwood

Trial court judgment denying plaintiff's petition for writs of mandate and prohibition is affirmed where: 1) the removal clause of the committee bylaws is not invalid despite conflicting with the Elections Code; 2) plaintiff's claims that the removal clause is unconstitutionally vague and that her removal violated her First Amendment and due process rights are rejected as plaintiff did not show that the state action requirement was satisfied; and 3) the expansion of Committee membership in the bylaws to include three classifications not specified in the Elections Code was not unlawful.   

Read Wilson v. San Luis Obispo County Democratic Central Comm., No. B209293 in PDF

Read Wilson v. San Luis Obispo County Democratic Central Comm., No. B209293 in HTML

Appellate Information
APPEAL from the Superior Court County of San Luis Obispo, Charles S. Crandall, Judge.
SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION SIX
Filed June 3, 2009
Published and Modified June 29, 2009

Judges
Before YEGAN, Acting P.J., COFFEE, J., PERREN, J.
Opinion by YEGAN, Acting P.J.  

Counsel
For Appellant: Dennis D. Law, Andre, Morris & Buttery, PC.
For Respondent: Saro G. Rizzo and Stewart D. Jenkins.

People v. Hajjaj, No. D054754

In felony case for transporting for sale a controlled substance, trial court order granting defendant's motion to dismiss and the judgment of dismissal are reversed and remanded where: 1) the court erred in granting defendant's motion and dismissing the case; and 2) the physical remoteness of the Indio court from the Riverside Hall of Justice constituted good cause within the meaning of section 1382(a) that justified commencement of the trial beyond the statutory time limit to allow defendant, his counsel, and the prosecutor to travel to the Indio court for the trial in this matter 

Read People v. Hajjaj, No. D054754 in PDF

Read People v. Hajjaj, No. D054754 in HTML

Appellate Information
APPEAL from an order and judgment of the Superior Court of Riverside County, Thomas H. Cahraman, Judge. Reversed and remanded. 
FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION ONE
Filed June 29, 2009

Judges
Before NARES, J., McCONNELL, P.J., BENKE, J.
Opinion by Nares, J.   

Counsel
For Plaintiff: Rod Pacheco, District Attorney, and Alan D. Tate, Deputy District Attorney.
For Defendant: Benedon & Serlin and Douglas G. Benedon, under appointment by the Court of Appeal.

In re Martinez, No. S141480

Petition for writ of habeas corpus is denied and order to show cause discharged where in light of Medeelin, defendant is precluded from renewing his claim under the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations since he previously raised the issue and was denied relief on its merits. Defendant's petition is thus successive, and he fails to demonstrate any change of circumstance or the applicability of any exception to the procedural bar of successiveness that would warrant reconsideration of his claim. 

Read In re Martinez, No. S141480 in PDF

Read In re Martinez, No. S141480 in HTML

Appellate Information
Habeas Corpus
Filed: June 29, 2009

Judges
Before MORENO, J. WE CONCUR: GEORGE, C.J., KENNARD, C., BAXTER, J., CHIN, J., MORENO, J., CORRIGAN, J.
Opinion by MORENO, J. 
Concurring Opinion by KENNARD, J.

Counsel
For Appellant: Chet L. Taylor and Sandra L. Babcock.

For Respondent: Bill Lockyer and Edmund G. Brown, Jr., Attorneys General, Robert R. Anderson and Dane R. Gillette, Chief Assistant Attorneys General, Gary W. Schons, Assistant Attorney General, Holly D. Wilkens and Ivy Fitzpatrick, Deputy Attorneys General.

Arias v. Superior Court of San Joaquin Valley, No. S155965

In an action alleging violations of the Labor Code, labor regulations, and an Industrial Welfare Commission wage order, Court of Appeals judgment is affirmed where: 1) employee who sues an employer under the unfair competition law for Labor Code violations must satisfy class action requirements, and Proposition 64's amendment of law does not require otherwise; and 2) class action requirements do not need to be satisfied when an aggrieved employee seeks civil penalties for himself and other employees under the Labor Code Private Attorneys General Act of 2004 for an employer's alleged Labor Code violations. 

Read Arias v. Superior Court of San Joaquin Valley, No. S155965 in PDF

Read Arias v. Superior Court of San Joaquin Valley, No. S155965 in HTML

Appellate Information
San Joaquin County Super. Ct. No. CV028612
Filed: June 29, 2009

Judges
Before KENNARD, J. WE CONCUR: GEORGE, C.J., BAXTER, J., CHIN, J., MORENO, J., CORRIGAN, J.
Opinion by KENNARD, J.
Concurring Opinion by WERDEGAR, J.

Counsel
For Appellant: California Rural Legal Assistance, Inc., Blanca A. Bañuelos and Michael L. Meuter.
For Respondent/Real Party in Interest: Barsamian, Saqui & Moody, Saqui & Raimondo, Michael C. Saqui; McCormick, Barstow, Sheppard, Wayte & Carruth and Anthony P. Raimondo

In an action brought by labor unions against transportation industry employers under the unfair competition law and the Labor Code Private Attorney General Act of 2004, Court of Appeals judgment is affirmed where: 1) a plaintiff has standing to bring an unfair competition law action only if the plaintiff has suffered injury in fact, and an injured employee's assignment of rights cannot confer standing on an uninjured assignee; 2) a plaintiff has standing to bring an action under the Labor Code Private Attorneys General Act of 2004 only if the plaintiff is an aggrieved employee, and an aggrieved employee cannot assign a claim for statutory penalties as the employee does not own an assignable interest; and 3) a representative action under the unfair competition law must be brought as a class action. 

Read Amalgamated Transit Union v. Superior Court of LA County, No. S151615 in PDF

Read Amalgamated Transit Union v. Superior Court of LA County, No. S151615 in HTML

Appellate Information
Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. KC043962
Filed: June 29, 2009

Judges
Before KENNARD, J. WE CONCUR: GEORGE, C.J., BAXTER, J., CHIN, J., MORENO, J., CORRIGAN, J.
Opinion by KENNARD, J.
Concurring Opinion by WERDEGAR, J.

People v. Ulloa, No. B201072

Sentence for kidnapping, rape and various other crimes is reversed and remanded where sufficient evidence does not support the trial court's finding that his prior conviction was a serious felony under the Three Strikes laws sentencing provisions.    

Read People v. Ulloa, No. B201072 in PDF

Read People v. Ulloa, No. B201072 in HTML

Appellate Information
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, Richard R. Romero, Judge. Affirmed in part with modifications, reversed in part, and remanded.
SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION FOUR
Filed June 26, 2009

Judges
Before EPSTEIN, P.J., WILLHITE, J., SUZUKAWA, J.
Opinion by EPSTEIN, J.

Counsel
For Plaintiff: Edmund G. Brown, Jr., Attorney General, Dane R. Gillette, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Pamela C. Hamanaka, Assistant Attorney General, Susan Sullivan Pithey and Beverly K. Falk, Deputy Attorneys General.
For Defendant: Mark D. Lenenberg, under appointment by the Court of Appeal.

Charisma R. v. Christina S., No. A122264

In a child custody dispute, trial court orders declaring plaintiff a presumed parent of the child and establishing a schedule for reunification is affirmed where: 1) substantial evidence supports the finding that the Family Code sec. 7611(d) parentage presumption applies, as the record shows that plaintiff actively participated in the child's conception and cared for her following birth, the limited duration of her parenting of the child does not defeat plaintiff's claim to presumed parent status, and plaintiff received the child into her home and openly held her out as her natural child; 2) the trial court did not abuse its discretion in concluding there is no basis to rebut the parentage presumption as substantial evidence supports the finding that the Elisa B. factors are present and that plaintiff actively participated in the child's conception with the understanding she would parent with defendant, and no other facts justified rebuttal of the parentage presumption; and 3) defendant's equal protection claim fails as she has not shown that a case involving a man in plaintiff's circumstances would be decided any differently under the law, and failed to meet her burden of showing that the order declaring plaintiff the second parent was an unconstitutional infringement of her state and federal rights to substantive due process.      

Read Charisma R. v. Christina S., No. A122264 in PDF

Read Charisma R. v. Christina S., No. A122264 in HTML


Appellate Information
Superior Court of Alameda County, No. HF04153838, Wynne S. Carvill and Kevin R. Murphy, Judges.
FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION FIVE
Filed June 26, 2009

Judges
Before SIMONS, Acting P.J., NEEDHAM, J., BRUINIERS, J.
Opinion by SIMONS, J.

Counsel
For Plaintiff: Squire, Sanders & Dempsey LLP, Amy E. Rose, Robert J. Guite and Jason M. Richardson.
For Defendant: Liberty Counsel and Mary E. McAlister.

Carmel, Ltd. v. Tavoussi, No. G040079

Trial court order denying defendants' application under Code of Civil Procedure sec. 4731 to vacate a default judgment is reversed and remanded where: 1) defendants' appeal is timely; and 2) the trial court erred in denying defendants' motion to vacate as defendants' failure to answer and prevent the entry of their default was caused by their counsel's neglect and they substantially complied with the requirement to submit a proposed answer with the motion.    

Read Carmel, Ltd. v. Tavoussi, No. G040079 in PDF

Read Carmel, Ltd. v. Tavoussi, No. G040079 in HTML

Appellate Information
Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of Orange County, Randell L. Wilkinson, Judge. Reversed and remanded.
FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION THREE
Filed May 27, 2009
Modified and Published June 26, 2009

Judges
Before ARONSON, J., BEDSWORTH, ACTING P.J., FYBEL, J.
Opinion by ARONSON, J.

Counsel
For Plaintiff: Rogers, MacLeith & Stolp and Thomas J. Stolp.
For Defendant: Law Offices of M. Candice Bryner and M. Candice Bryner.

State Farm Gen. Ins. Co. v. Mintarsih, No. B202888

In a dispute involving insurance liability coverage, trial court judgment is affirmed in part and reversed in part where: 1) defendant established no basis to hold plaintiff liable for attorney fees awarded as costs against the insured party; 2) Insurance Code sec. 533 precludes indemnity for the damages awarded to defendant for false imprisonment and negligence; and 3) plaintiff has no obligation to pay additional postjudgment interest.    

Read State Farm Gen. Ins. Co. v. Mintarsih, No. B202888 in PDF

Read State Farm Gen. Ins. Co. v. Mintarsih, No. B202888 in HTML

Appellate Information
APPEALS from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, Mark V. Mooney, Judge. Affirmed in part and reversed in part with directions.
SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION THREE.
Filed June 25, 2009

Judges
Before CROSKEY, J., KLEIN, P.J., ALDRICH, J.
Opinion by CROSKEY, J.

Counsel
For Plaintiff: Horvitz & Levy, Barry R. Levy, Daniel J. Gonzalez; Grant, Genevose & Baratta, James M. Baratta and Jason S. Roberts.

For Defendant: Garrard & Davis, Donald A. Garrard; The Ehrlich Law Firm and Jeffrey Isaac Ehrlich

In re Jenkins, No. C059321

Trial court order granting relief on a habeas corpus petition is reversed where: 1) the prison warden's notice of appeal was timely filed under California Rules of Court 8.308(a); and 2) the court erred in determining defendant was entitled to additional work/school performance points for the time he did not actually participate in any work, school, or vocational program, as the department's interpretation of the applicable regulation and decision to deny defendant the additional performance points he sought has a rational basis and was not arbitrary, capricious, or irrational and thus must be upheld.   

Read In re Jenkins, No. C059321 in PDF

Read In re Jenkins, No. C059321 in HTML

Appellate Information
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Lassen County, Dawson Arnold, Court Commissioner. Reversed.
THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT.
Filed June 25, 2009

Judges
Before ROBIE, J., SCOTLAND, P.J., CANTIL-SAKAUYE, J.
Opinion by ROBIE, P.J.

Counsel
For Respondent: S. Lynne Klein, under appointment by the Court of Appeal.

For Appellant: Edmund G. Brown, Jr., Attorney General, Dane R. Gillette, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Julie L. Garland, Senior Assistant Attorney General, Jessica N. Blonien, Supervising Deputy Attorney General, Christopher J. Rench, Deputy Attorney General.

People v. Cervantes, No. B209350

Trial court order revoking defendant's probation and sentencing him to state prison is reversed where defendant did not violate his probation as the court mistakenly ordered him to appear for a probation violation hearing.   

Read People v. Cervantes, No. B209350 in PDF

Read People v. Cervantes, No. B209350 in HTML

Appellate Information
Ventura County, Super. Ct. Nos. 2005006623, 2007005712
SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION SIX
Filed June 25, 2009

Judges
Before GILBERT, P.J., YEGAN, J., PERREN, J.
Opinion by GILBERT, P.J.

Counsel
For Plaintiff: Edmund G. Brown, Jr., Attorney General, Pamela C. Hamanaka, Senior Assistant Attorney General, James William Bilderback II, Supervising Deputy Attorney General, David Zarmi, Deputy Attorney General.

For Defendant: Wayne C. Tobin, under appointment by the Court of Appeal.

People v. Dieck, No. S158076

Court of Appeals judgment is reversed where the court erred when it awarded credit for actual time served and not conduct credit, and in holding that defendant must spend at least six days in custody prior to being sentenced to be entitled to conduct credit pursuant to Penal Code sec. 4019. The statute does not require that a defendant spend six days in presentence confinement in order to be entitled to receive conduct credit, but instead entitles a defendant to conduct credit if he or she is sentenced to a period of at least six days without regard to the duration of presentence confinement. 

Read People v. Dieck, No. S158076 in PDF

Read People v. Dieck, No. S158076 in HTML

Appellate Information
Trinity County Super. Ct. No. 05F169
Ct.App. 3 Crim. C052606
Decided June 25, 2009

Judges
Before: MORENO, J. WE CONCUR: GEORGE, C.J., KENNARD, J., BAXTER, J., WERDEGAR, J., CHIN, J., CORRIGAN, J.
Opinion by MORENO, J.

Counsel
For Appellant: Gary E. McCurdy, under appointment by the Supreme Court, and William Davies, under appointment by the Court of Appeal.

For Respondent: Bill Lockyer and Edmund G. Brown, Jr., Attorneys General, Mary Jo Graves and Dane R. Gillette, Chief Assistant Attorneys General, Donald E. de Nicola, Deputy State Solicitor General, Michael P. Farrell, Assistant Attorney General, Janis Shank McLean, Jane N. Kirkland, David A. Rhodes, Janet E. Neeley and Paul A. Bernardino, Deputy Attorneys General.

Ruiz v. Podolsky, No. G040843

Trial court order denying petition to compel arbitration of the wrongful death action brought by adult children heirs of the deceased is affirmed where: 1) the court correctly concluded the adult children cannot be compelled to arbitrate their wrongful death claims as California's wrongful death statute does not create a derivative action and thus the deceased lacked authority to bind the wife or adult children to the physician-patient arbitration agreement he signed; and 2) the issue of whether the deceased's wife was bound to the arbitration agreement cannot be revisited as she failed to appeal from the court's order compelling arbitration of her claim.    

Read Ruiz v. Podolsky, No. G040843 in PDF

Read Ruiz v. Podolsky, No. G040843 in HTML

Appellate Information
Appeal from an order of the Superior Court of Orange County, James Di Cesare, Judge. Affirmed.
FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION THREE
Filed June 24, 2009

Judges
Before O'LEARY, J., SILLS, P.J., RYLAARSDAM, J.
Opinion by O'LEARY, J.

Counsel
For Plaintiff: Cornelius P. Bahan, Inc., and Cornelius P. Bahan

For Defendant: Schmid & Voiles, Denise H. Greer

People v. Sweeney, No. E043410

In an action involving a trial court order committing defendant to Porterville State Hospital, the trial court erred where: 1) due process rights are violated when the trial court determines that the charges pending against defendant involved death, great bodily injury, or an act which poses a serious threat of bodily harm to another person under Welfare and Institutions Code sec. 6500 as it is a matter for a jury; and 2) before a jury determines whether a person meets the criteria of Welfare and Institutions Code sec. 6500, the trial court must instruct the jury to find whether the person's mental retardation is a substantial factor in causing serious difficulty in controlling their dangerous behavior. However, the appeal is dismissed as moot since the commitment order has expired.    

Read P. v. Sweeney, No. E043410 in PDF

Read P. v. Sweeney, No. E043410 in HTML

Appellate Information
APPEAL from the Superior Court of Riverside County. Carl E. Davis, Judge. (Retired judge of the San Bernardino Super. Ct. assigned by the Chief Justice pursuant to art. VI, § 6 of the Cal. Const.) Dismissed.
FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION TWO
Filed June 24, 2009

Judges
Before MILLER J., GAUT Acting P. J., KING J.
Opinion by MILLER J.

Counsel
For Plaintiff: Christopher Blake

For Defendant: Edmund G. Brown, Jr., Attorney General, Dane R. Gillette, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Gary W. Schons, Assistant Attorney General, and Peter Quon, Jr., and Angela M. Borzachillo, Deputy Attorneys General

In an dispute involving an employment contract, trial court judgment is affirmed where the trial court properly denied defendant's motion to strike under the anti-SLAPP (strategic lawsuit against public participation) statute as plaintiff's retaliation and wrongful termination claims did not arise from defendant's protected First Amendment activity.    

Read McConnell v. Innovative Artists Talent and Literary Agency, Inc., No. B205533 in PDF

Read McConnell v. Innovative Artists Talent and Literary Agency, Inc., No. B205533 in HTML

Appellate Information
APPEALS from orders of the Superior Court for the County of Los Angeles. Joe W. Hilberman and Allan J. Goodman, Judges. Affirmed.
SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION EIGHT
Filed June 24, 2009

Judges
Before O'NEILL, J., FLIER, Acting P.J., BIGELOW, J.
Opinion by O'NEILL, J.

Counsel
For Plaintiff: Freedman & Taitelman, Bryan J. Freedman and Gerald L. Greengard

For Defendant: Paul A. Blechne

In an action for equitable contribution, trial court judgment is reversed in part and affirmed in part where: 1) the right of equitable contribution between insurers is not controlled by the contract between the insured and the insurer but by equitable principles; 2) substantial evidence does not support the trial court's determination that plaintiff's right of equitable contribution from co-insurer ICW arose on May 24, 2002; and 3) substantial evidence does not support the trial court's findings with respect to the dates on which plaintiff's right to equitable contribution from defendant arose.   

Read OneBeacon America Insurance Co. v. Fireman's Fund Insurance Co., No. B209526 in PDF

Read OneBeacon America Insurance Co. v. Fireman's Fund Insurance Co., No. B209526 in HTML

Appellate Information
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County. Ralph W. Dau, Judge. Appeal dismissed as to National Surety Corporation; judgment affirmed in part and reversed in part with directions.
SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION ONE
Filed June 24, 2009

Judges
Before MALLANO, P.J., ROTHSCHILD, J. WEISBERG, J.
Opinion by MALLANO, P.J.

Counsel
For Plaintiff: Musick, Peeler & Garrett, Susan J. Field, Jennifer M. Kokes and David H. Oken

For Defendant: Tressler, Soderstrom, Maloney & Priess, Paul S. White, Dana H. Sheridan and Jeanne S. Kuo

Crawford v. City of Los Angeles, No. B210821

In an employment termination action, trial court judgment is reversed and remanded where: 1) trial court erred in ruling that two of the counts of the administrative charges were barred by the statute of limitations as the the court made a mathematical error and those charges were not time barred; and 2) the charge against plaintiff of alleging a false statement during an investigation is not time barred under the one-year statute of limitations contained in the Public Safety Officers Procedural Bill of Rights Act as the factual scenario differs from that Alameida v. State Personnel Bd.    

Read Crawford v. City of Los Angeles, No. B210821 in PDF

Read Crawford v. City of Los Angeles, No. B210821 in HTML

Appellate Information
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, David P. Yaffe, Judge. Reversed and remanded.
SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION FIVE
Filed June 24, 2009

Judges
Before: KRIEGLER, J., TURNER, P.J., ARMSTRONG, J.
Opinion by KRIEGLER, J.

Counsel
For Petitioner: Diane Marchant

For Respondent: Rockard J. Delgadillo

Linthicum v. Butterfield, No. B199645A

In a dispute between owners of neighboring parcels involving the use of a roadway, trial court judgment is affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded where: 1) the trial court balanced all the hardships and acted within its discretion in denying the injunction; 2) the court did not err in failing to award damages; 3) the court's decision is remanded so that the trial court can clarify their judgment with regard to the width of the easement and roadway; 4) the court's erred in granting judgment against plaintiff on their second cause of action to quiet title; and 5) the trial court properly held that that the Bjorklunds' Code of Civil Procedure section 998 offer is valid.   

Read Linthicum v. Butterfield, No. B199645A in PDF

Read Linthicum v. Butterfield, No. B199645A in HTML

Appellate Information
SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION SIX
Filed June 24, 2009

Judges
Before: GILBERT, P.J., YEGAN, J., PERREN, J.
Opinion by GILBERT, J.

In re Y.G., No. B210847

Trial court order adjudging Y.G. as a dependent child under Welfare and Institutions Code sec. 300 (b) is affirmed where the statutory language does permit the juvenile court to consider a parent's misconduct with an unrelated child in determining a Welfare and Institutions Code sec. 300 (b) allegation.      

Read In re Y.G., No. B210847 in PDF

Read In re Y.G., No. B210847 in HTML

Appellate Information
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, Robert L. Stevenson, Referee. Affirmed.
SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION FOUR
Filed: June 23, 2009

Judges
Before WILLHITE, J., EPSTEIN, P.J., MANELLA, J.
Opinion by WILLHITE, J.

Counsel
For Plaintiff: Raymond G. Fortner, Jr., County Counsel, James M. Owens, Assistant County Counsel, and O. Raquel Ramirez, Deputy County Counsel.

For Defendant: Kate M. Chandler, under appointment by the Court of Appeal.

Gdowski v. Gdowski, No. G040975

Trial court issuance of a protective order against defendant under the Elder Abuse and Dependent Adult Civil Protection Act is reversed where: 1) a protective order under the Elder Abuse Act may issue on the basis of evidence of past abuse, without any particularized showing that the wrongful acts will be continued or repeated; and 2) the trial court erred in basing its decision in issuing the protective order on counsel's conduct rather than on substantial evidence.      

Read Gdowski v. Gdowski, No. G040975 in PDF

Read Gdowski v. Gdowski, No. G040975 in HTML

Appellate Information
Appeal from an order of the Superior Court of Orange County, Thomas H. Schulte, Temporary Judge. Reversed.
SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION THREE
Filed: June 23, 2009

Judges
Before FYBEL, J., SILLS, P. J., IKOLA, J.
Opinion by FYBEL, J.

Counsel
For Plaintiff: Law Offices of Marjorie G. Fuller, Marjorie G. Fuller and Lisa R. Wiley.

For Defendant: Cox, Castle & Nicholson and Stanley W. Lamport.

Robbins v. Davi, No. B199013

Trial court judgment denying plaintiff's petition to require the Real Estate Commissioner to set aside the decision revoking his license as a real estate broker is affirmed where plaintiff's crimes were substantially related to the qualifications, functions or duties of a real estate licensee.      

Read Robbins v. Davi, No. B199013 in PDF

Read Robbins v. Davi, No. B199013 in HTML

Appellate Information
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court for the County of Los Angeles. Dzintra Janavs, Judge. Affirmed.
SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION EIGHT
Filed: June 23, 2009

Judges
Before BAUER, J., RUBIN, Acting P.J., FLIER, J.
Opinion by BAUER, J.

Counsel
For Plaintiff: The Law Offices of Thomas A. Nitti and Thomas A. Nitti.

For Defendant: Edmund G. Brown Jr., Attorney General, W. Dean Freeman and Felix Leatherwood, Supervising Deputy Attorneys General, and Marla K. Markman, Deputy
Attorney General

Los Angeles Unified School District v. Pulgarin, No. B206892

Trial court order order dismissing defendant's claim for loss of goodwill connected to the acquisition by eminent domain of real property is reversed where the court erred in concluding that defendant was not entitled to compensation for goodwill because it was a month-to-month tenant as nothing requires that a business owner's entitlement to goodwill must be based on a written lease on the property that is taken.     

Read Los Angeles Unified School District v. Pulgarin, No. B206892 in PDF

Read Los Angeles Unified School District v. Pulgarin, No. B206892 in HTML

 
Appellate Information
APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, Joanne O'Donnell, Judge. Reversed.
SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION FOUR
Filed: June 23, 2009

Judges
Before EPSTEIN, P.J., MANELLA, J., SUZUKAWA, J.
Opinion by EPSTEIN, P.J.

Counsel
For Plaintiff: Oliver, Sandifer & Murphy, Connie Cooke Sandifer and Cynthia C. Miller.

For Defendant: Century Law Group, Karen A. Larson and Daniel A. Woodford.

People v. Millard, No. D047681

Postjudgment order awarding restitution following defendant's conviction of driving under the influence while committing an act forbidden by law and causing bodily injury to another person is affirmed in part and reversed to the extent it awarded attorney fees and costs as a trial court may apply the doctrine of comparative negligence in awarding victim restitution against a criminally negligent defendant when the court finds the victim's contributory negligence was a substantial factor in causing his or her injuries.  

Read People v. Millard, No. D047681 in HTML

Read People v. Millard, No. D047681 in PDF

Appellate Information
APPEALS from a judgment and order of the Superior Court of Orange, John A. Torribio, Judge. Judgment affirmed.
FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION ONE
Decided: June 22, 2009


Judges
Before: McDONALD, J., HALLER, Acting P.J., IRION, J.
Opinion by: McDONALD, J.

Counsel
Law Office of William J. Kopeny & Associates and William J. Kopeny for Defendant and Appellant.

Edmund G. Brown, Jr., Attorney General, Dane R. Gillette, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Gary W. Schons, Assistant Attorney General, James D. Dutton and Melissa Mandel, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Appellant.

People v. Govea, No. B205715

Conviction for attempted murder, assault by means likely to produce great bodily injury, aggravated mayhem, and the unlawful taking of a vehicle is affirmed where although trial court erred when it refused to hear defendant's Marsden motions during the period when criminal proceedings were suspended, and should have conducted a hearing even though defendant's competence to stand trial was undetermined, the error was harmless and unprejudicial.  

Read People v. Govea, No. B205715 in HTML

Read People v. Govea, No. B205715 in PDF

Appellate Information
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, Patrick T. Meyers, Judge. Modified and affirmed.
SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION FOUR
Decided: June 22, 2009


Judges
Before: SUZUKAWA, J., EPSTEIN, P.J., MANELLA, J.
Opinion by: SUZUKAWA, J.

Counsel
Edmund G. Brown, Jr., Attorney General, Dane R. Gillette, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Pamela C. Hamanaka, Senior Assistant Attorney General, Linda C. Johnson and Carl N. Henry, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent.

Carlo Andreani, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.

Haah v. Kim, No. B209179

Trial court's grant of plaintiff's petition to invalidate the appointment or election of defendants as directors of Galleria Plus, Inc. is affirmed where: 1) defendant forfeited any claim of error with regard to the court's ruling on the demurrer; 2) the trial court correctly found that plaintiffs had standing to bring the present action; and 3) defendant failed to object in trial court to the appointment of new directors and thus forfeited any objection he might have. 

Read Haah v. Kim, No. B209179 in HTML

Read Haah v. Kim, No. B209179 in PDF

Appellate Information
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court for Los Angeles County, James C. Chalfant, Judge. Affirmed.
SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION FOUR
Decided: June 22, 2009


Judges
Before: WILLHITE, J., EPSTEIN, P. J., MANELLA, J.
Opinion by: WILLHITE, J.

Counsel
Katten Muchin Rosenman, Helen B. Kim and Marisa G. Westervelt for Plaintiffs and Respondents.

David D. Kim & Associates, David D. Kim, Matthew E. Karanian, and Mark M. Higuchi for Defendant and Appellant.

In re K.P., No. C060327

Juvenile court order terminating mother's parental rights and setting adoption as the permanent placement goal is affirmed where neither the Department of Health and Human Services nor the juvenile court was under a duty to comply with the notice provisions of the Indian Child Welfare Act, and the court declines to extend the Act to cover an allegation of membership in a tribe not recognized by the federal government. 

Read In re K.P., No. C060327 in HTML

Read In re K.P., No. C060327 in PDF

Appellate Information
Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of Placer County, John Ross, Commissioner. Affirmed
THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT
Decided: June 22, 2009


Judges
Before: SIMS Acting P.J., RAYE J., CANTIL-SAKAUYE J.

Counsel
Anthony LaBouff, County Counsel, and James R. Yeo, for Plaintiff and Respondent.

Nicole A. Williams, under appointment by the Court of Appeal for Defendant and Appellant V.M.

Christopher Blake, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant J.M.

Guzman v. County of Monterey, No. S157793

In a negligence action brought under the Safe Drinking Water Act, Court of Appeals judgment is reversed where the County was not subject to an implied mandatory duty for purposes of Government Code sec. 815.6 liability or under Health and Safety Code secs. 64256(e) and 64257(a) to notify residents of any reported water contamination.

Read Guzman v. County of Monterey , No. S157793 in HTML.

Read Guzman v. County of Monterey , No. S157793 in PDF.

Appellate Information
Monterey County Super. Ct. No. M71543
Ct.App. 6 H030647
Decided June 22, 2009

Judges

Before: CHIN, J. WE CONCUR: GEORGE, C.J. KENNARD, J. BAXTER, J. WERDEGAR, J. MORENO, J. CORRIGAN, J.
Opinion by CHIN, J.

Counsel

Attorneys for Appellant: Sullivan Hill Lewin Rez & Engel, Brian L. Burchett; Law Offices of Richard H. Rosenthal, Richard H. Rosenthal; Selden Law Firm and Lynde Selden II for Plaintiffs and Appellants.

Attorneys for Respondent: Charles J. McKee, County Counsel, and Patrick McGreal, Deputy County Counsel, for Defendants and Respondents. Dennis J. Herrera, City Attorney (San Francisco), Joanne Hoeper, Chief Trial Deputy, John S. Roddy and Donald P. Margolis, Deputy City Attorneys, for California State Association of Counties and League of California Cities as Amici Curiae on behalf of Defendants and Respondents. Edmund G. Brown, Jr., Attorney General, David S. Chaney, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Gordon B. Burns, Deputy State Solicitor General, James M. Schiavenza, Assistant Attorney General, and Kristin G. Hogue, Deputy Attorney General, for California Health and Human Services Agency, California Department of Public Health, California Department of Aging, California Department of Alcohol and Drug Programs, California Department of Child Support Services, California Department of Community Services and Development, California Department of Developmental Services, California Emergency Medical Services Authority, California Department of Health Care Services, California Managed Risk Medical Insurance Board, California Department of Mental Health, California Department of Rehabilitation, California Department of Social Services and California Office of Statewide Health Planning and Development as Amici Curiae on behalf of Defendants and Respondents.

People v. Medina, No. S155823

Court of Appeals judgment holding there was insufficient evidence to convict the nonshooting defendants is reversed where there is substantial evidence to support the murder and attempted murder convictions of the defendants and a rational trier of fact could have concluded that the shooting death of the victim was a reasonably foreseeable consequence of the assault.

Read People v. Medina, No. S155823 in HTML.

Read People v. Medina, No. S155823 in PDF.

Appellate Information

Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. MA028151
Ct.App. 2/4 B189049
Decided June 22, 2009

Judges

Majority opinion by CHIN, J., joined by GEORGE, C.J. BAXTER, J. CORRIGAN, J.

Dissenting opinion by MORENO, J., joined by KENNARD, J. WERDEGAR, J.

Counsel

Attorneys for Appellant:

Chris R. Redburn, under appointment by the Supreme Court; and Joy A. Maulitz for Defendant and Appellant Jose Jesus Medina.

John Steinberg, under appointment by Supreme Court, for Defendant and Appellant George J. Marron.

Mark D. Lenenberg, under appointment by Supreme Court, for Defendant and Appellant Raymond Vallejo.

Attorneys for Respondent:

Edmund G. Brown, Jr., Attorney General, Dane R. Gillette, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Pamela C. Hamanaka, Assistant Attorney General, Victoria B. Wilson, Kristofer Jorstad, Joseph P. Lee and Mary Sanchez, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent.

M.S. v. Riverside Cty. Dept. of Soc. Servs., No. E045331

In a petition to terminate Plaintiff's parental rights, Plaintiff's Welfare & Institutions Code section 388 petition is remanded with instructions to dismiss, where the Juvenile Court no longer had jurisdiction to hear the matter because the child's dependency had been terminated.

Read M.S. v. Riverside Cty. Dept. of Soc. Servs., No. E045331 in HTML.

Read M.S. v. Riverside Cty. Dept. of Soc. Servs., No. E045331 in PDF.

Appellate Information

APPEAL from the Superior Court of Riverside County. Christopher J. Sheldon, Judge. Dismissed.
FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION TWO
Decided June 19, 2009

Judges

Judges
Before: McKinster J., Ramirez P.J., Hollenhorst J.
Opinion by McKinster J.

Counsel

Konrad S. Lee, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Plaintiff and Appellant.

Joe S. Rank, County Counsel, and Prabhath D. Shettigar, Deputy County Counsel, for Defendant and Respondent.

John L. Dodd, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Minor.

Kevin Q. v. Lauren W., No. G040343

In an appeal from a paternity judgment finding that Plaintiff was the father of Defendant's son, the judgment is reversed, because the child's biological father signed a voluntary declaration of paternity, which functioned as a judgment of paternity under Family Code section 7573.

Read Kevin Q. v. Lauren W., No. G040343 in HTML. 

Read Kevin Q. v. Lauren W., No. G040343 in PDF.

Appellate Information

Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of Orange County, Robert D. Monarch, Judge. (Retired judge of the Orange Super. Ct. assigned by the Chief Justice pursuant to art. VI, § 6.) Reversed and remanded with directions.
FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION THREE
Decided June 19, 2009

Judges

Before: RAMIREZ P.J., McKINSTER J. RICHLI J.
Opinion by RAMIREZ P.J.

Counsel

Law Offices of Opri & Associates and Debra A. Opri for Appellant.

Law Offices of Marjorie G. Fuller and Marjorie G. Fuller for Respondent.

Bisno v. Douglas Emmett Realty Fund 1988, No. B193604

In an action arising out of a landlord-tenant dispute, judgment for Plaintiff is reversed, where 1) the litigation privilege precluded Plaintiff's malicious prosecution claims; and 2) a client who provides a copy of a contract to counsel, when seeking legal advice, is not obligated to point out any particular provision to the lawyer as a prerequisite to the advice-of-counsel defense.

Read Bisno v. Douglas Emmett Realty Fund 1988, No. B193604 in HTML. 

Read Bisno v. Douglas Emmett Realty Fund 1988, No. B193604 in PDF.

Appellate Information

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County. Phrasel L. Shelton, Judge. Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded.
SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION ONE
Decided June 19, 2009

Judges

Before: RAMIREZ P.J., McKINSTER J. RICHLI J.
Opinion by RAMIREZ P.J.

Counsel

Nagler & Associates, Lawrence H. Nagler and David F. Berry for Plaintiff and Appellant.

Lewis Brisbois Bisgaard & Smith, Roy G. Weatherup, Caroline E. Chan; Law Offices of Sherwood and Hardgrove, Don C. Sherwood; Hinshaw & Culbertson, John W. Sheller and Filomena E. Meyer for Defendants and Appellants.

People v. Valdez, No. E045289

Defendant's rape with a foreign object sentence is affirmed where Defendant claimed that the prohibition on granting probation to one convicted of rape with a foreign object violated Equal Protection because no similar prohibition applied to simple rape, but prohibiting the trial court from exercising its discretion to grant probation to the parent of a child conceived by rape would run counter to a number of legitimate societal goals.

Read People v. Valdez, No. E045289 in HTML.

Read People v. Valdez, No. E045289 in PDF.

Appellate Information

APPEAL from the Superior Court of Riverside County. Elisabeth Sichel, Judge. Affirmed.
FOURTH DISTRICT, DIVISION TWO
Decided June 19, 2009

Judges

Before: RAMIREZ P.J., McKINSTER J. RICHLI J.
Opinion by RAMIREZ P.J.

Counsel

Marilee Marshall, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.

Edmund G. Brown, Jr., Attorney General, Dane R. Gillette, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Gary W. Schons, Assistant Attorney General, Jeffrey J. Koch, Barry Carlton, and Scott C. Taylor, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent.

In re Hovanski, No. C059192

In a habeas petition seeking relief from a hold the Department of Corrections placed on Petitioner a day before his release date, the petition is denied, where Cal. Penal Code section 6601.3 authorized the continued incarceration of a parolee past his discharge date upon a showing of good cause.

Read In re Hovanski, No. C059192 in HTML.  

Read In re Hovanski, No. C059192 in PDF.

Appellate Information

ORIGINAL PROCEEDINGS: Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus. Petition denied.
THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT
Decided June 18, 2009

Judges
Before: BUTZ , J., SCOTLAND , P. J. SIMS , J.
Opinion by BUTZ , J.

Counsel

Eric Weaver, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Petitioner Thomas Hovanski.

Edmund G. Brown, Jr., Attorney General, Dane R. Gillette, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Michael P. Farrell, Assistant Attorney General, Julie A. Hokans and Catherine Chatman, Deputy Attorneys General, for Respondent the Secretary of the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation.

Loeffler v. Medina, No. D053096

In an appeal from an order denying Defendant's application to terminate a domestic violence restraining order, the order is affirmed where the trial court did not abuse its discretion because, although Defendant claimed to have moved out of state, there was evidence that he maintained contact with the local area.

Read Loeffler v. Medina, No. D053096.

Appellate Information

APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of San Diego County, Christine K. Goldsmith, Judge. Affirmed.
FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT
Filed June 18, 2009

Judges

Before IRION, J., HUFFMAN, Acting P.J., MCINTYRE, J.
Opinion by IRION, J.

Counsel

Stephen H. Frantz; Dennis Seymour for Defendant and Appellant.

William M. Henrich for Plaintiff and Respondent.

People v. Shetty, No. B205061

Defendant's home equity sales fraud conviction is affirmed where the warrant issued for Defendant's arrest was timely, as the applicable statute of limitations was four years because the Civil Code section 1695.8 violation at issue was an offense involving fraud.

Read People v. Shetty, No. B205061.

Appellate Information

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, Judith L. Champagne, Judge. Affirmed.
SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT
Filed June 18, 2009

Judges

Before TURNER, P.J., ARMSTRONG, J., KRIEGLER, J.
Opinion by TURNER, P.J.

Counsel

Marilee Marshall & Associates and Jennifer Peabody, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.

Edmund G. Brown, Jr., Attorney General, Dane R. Gillette, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Pamela C. Hamanaka, Senior Assistant Attorney General, Keith H. Borjon and John R. Gorey, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent.

People v. M.B., No. F055289

The grant of the state's petition to make Defendant a ward of the state is affirmed where Welfare and Institutions Code section 7331 allows a juvenile court to commit a ward to the Division of Juvenile Facilities (DJF) for a violation of probation: 1) if the offense for which the ward received the probation is a DJF-eligible offense; and 2) no petition alleging a more recent non-DJF-eligible offense has been sustained.

Read People v. M.B., No. F055289.

Appellate Information

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Kern County. Peter A. Warmerdam, Juvenile Court Referee.
Cal. 5th App. Dist.
Filed June 18, 2009

Judges

Before: Wiseman, Acting P.J., Gomes, J., Kane, J.
Opinion by Wiseman, Acting P.J.

Counsel

Courtney M. Selan, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.

Edmund G. Brown, Jr., Attorney General, Michael P. Farrell, Assistant Attorney General, Louis M. Vasquez and Lloyd G. Carter, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent.

In an action to foreclose on a mechanic's lien, the grant of Defendant's motion to remove the lien is reversed where the work performed by Plaintiff was a removal of buildings, which is included in the definition of a "work of improvement" under Cal. Civ. Code section 3106.

Read United Rentals Northwest, Inc. v. Snider Lumber Prods., Inc., No. F055855.

Appellate Information

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Tuolumne County. James A. Boscoe, Judge.
Cal. 5th App. Dist.
Filed June 18, 2009

Judges
Before: Wiseman, Acting P.J., Gomes, J., Kane, J.
Opinion by Wiseman, Acting P.J.

Counsel

Urtnowski & Associates, J. Brian Urtnowski and William P. Warden, for Plaintiff and Appellant.

Dun & Martinek, Randall H. Davis, for Defendants and Respondents.

People v. Butler, No. S055501

Defendant's capital murder conviction is affirmed where: 1) the trial court did not abuse its discretion in finding that joining Defendant's case with an unrelated jailhouse murder charge against Defendant would create unnecessary complexity; and 2) there was no merit in Defendant's complaint that the jury would be surprised if it learned about the jailhouse killing at the penalty phase.

Read the full decision in People v. Butler, No. S055501.

Appellate Information:

APPEAL from Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. NA019605, Judge James B. Pierce.
Opinion filed on June 18, 2009

Judges:

Before CORRIGAN, GEORGE, KENNARD, BAXTER, WERDEGAR, CHIN, MORENO.
Opinion by CORRIGAN, J.

Counsel:

Attorneys for Appellant
Michael J. Hersek, State Public Defender, under appointment by the Supreme Court, Kate Johnston and Karen Hamilton, Deputy State Public Defenders, for Defendant and Appellant.

Attorneys for Respondent
Bill Lockyer and Edmund G. Brown, Jr., Attorneys General, Robert R. Anderson and Dane R. Gillette, Chief Assistant Attorneys General, Pamela C. Hamanaka, Assistant Attorney General, Keith H. Borjon, John R. Gorey and Noah P. Hill, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent.

In a First Amendment challenge to a public school district policy prohibiting political communication via school mailboxes, the denial of the writ of mandate sought by Plaintiff is affirmed where the mailboxes were a nonpublic forum, and the regulation was content-neutral.

Read the full decision in San Leandro Teachers Ass'n. v. Governing Bd. of the San Leandro Unified Sch. Dist.No. S156961.

Appellate Information:

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, Rolf M. Treu, Judge. Affirmed. Ct.App. 1/1 A114679 & A115686
Alameda County Super. Ct. No. RG05235795
Opinion filed on June 18, 2009


Judges:

Before MORENO, GEORGE, KENNARD, BAXTER, WERDEGAR, CHIN, and CORRIGAN.
Opinion by MORENO, J.


Counsel:

Attorneys for Appellant

Littler Mendelson, Garry G. Mathiason, Kimberly L. Owens and Olga Savage for Defendants and Appellants.

James S. Burling and Harold E. Johnson for Pacific Legal Foundation and National Tax Limitation Committee as Amici Curiae on behalf of Defendants and Appellants.

Liebert Cassidy Whitmore, Bruce A. Barsook, David A. Urban and Didier Y. Reiss for California School Boards Association, Association of California School Administrators and School Employers Association of California as Amici Curiae on behalf of Defendants and Appellants.

Ruiz & Sperow, Celia M. Ruiz and David E. Lyon for Association of California School Administrators as Amicus Curiae on behalf of Defendants and Appellants.


Attorneys for Respondent

California Teachers Association, Priscilla S. Winslow, Joseph R. Colton, Beverly Tucker, Ballinger G. Kemp and Ramon E. Romero for Plaintiffs and Respondents.

Michael R. Clancy and Christina C. Bleuler for California School Employees Association as Amicus Curiae on behalf of Plaintiffs and Respondents.

Rothner, Segall & Greenstone, Glenn Rothner, Lisa C. Demidovich and Jonathan Cohen for American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees and Service Employees International Union Local 99 as Amici Curiae on behalf of Plaintiffs and Respondents.

Julia Harumi Mass, Alan L. Schlosser; David Blair-Loy; and Peter Elisasberg for American Civil Liberties Union of Northern California, American Civil Liberties Union of San Diego and Imperial Counties and American Civil Liberties Union of Southern California as Amici Curiae on behalf of Plaintiffs and Respondents.

The Thomas Jefferson Center for the Protection of Free Expression, Robert M. O'Neil and J. Joshua Wheeler as Amici Curiae on behalf of Plaintiffs and Respondents.

Law Offices of Robert J. Bezemek, Robert J. Bezemek, Patricia Lim and David Conway for The California Federation of Teachers, The Faculty Association of the California Community Colleges and The California Community College Independents Organization as Amici Curiae on behalf of Plaintiffs and Respondents.

Sturgeon v. Bratton, No. B209913

In an action challenging an LAPD policy prohibiting officers from initiating police action to discover the immigration status of an individual, summary judgment for Defendant is affirmed where: 1) plaintiff failed to adduce evidence supporting an as-applied challenge; and 2) federal law did not preempt the policy on its face.

Read the full decision in Sturgeon v. Bratton, No. B209913. [html]

Read the full decision in Sturgeon v. Bratton, No. B209913. [pdf]

Appellate Information:

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, Rolf M. Treu, Judge. Affirmed.
Opinion filed on June 17, 2009

Judges:

Before CROSKEY, J., KLEIN, P.J., and KITCHING, J.
Opinion by CROSKEY, J.

Counsel:

Judicial Watch, Inc. and Sterling E. Norris for Plaintiff and Appellant.

Rockard J. Delgadillo, City Attorney and Paul L. Winnemore, Deputy City Attorney for Defendants and Respondents.

ACLU Foundation of Southern California, Hector O. Villagra, Belinda Escobosa Helzer, Mark Rosenbaum and Ahilan Arulanantham for Interveners and Respondents.

In re J.K., No. B210150

In an appeal from an order terminating Defendant's parental rights in a juvenile dependency proceeding, the order is affirmed, where the court can exercise dependency jurisdiction based on findings of prior instances of serious harm or abuse, and the evidence in the record is sufficient to support a finding of future risk of harm.

Read the full decision in In re J.K., No. B210150. [html]   

Read the full decision in n re J.K., No. B210150. [pdf]

Appellate Information:

APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County. Debra Losnick, Juvenile Court Referee. Affirmed.
Opinion filed on May 18, 2009.
Certified for publication June 17, 2009


Judges:

Before PERLUSS, P.J., WOODS, J., and ZELON, J.
Opinion by WOODS, J.


Counsel:

Nicole Williams, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.

Raymond G. Fortner, Jr., County Counsel, James M. Owens, Assistant County Counsel, and Judith A. Luby, Principal Deputy County Counsel, for Plaintiff and Respondent.

Hernandez v. Vitamin Shoppe Indus. Inc., No. A120640

In an appeal from sanctions issued against an attorney for improperly soliciting opt-outs from a plaintiff class, the order is affirmed where the court's post-certification duties and authority extend to circumstances involving the conditional certification of a class for settlement purposes.

Read the full decision in Hernandez v. Vitamin Shoppe Indus. Inc., No. A120640. [html] 

Read the full decision in Hernandez v. Vitamin Shoppe Indus. Inc., No. A120640. [pdf]

Appellate Information:

APPEAL from Marin County Superior Court, the Honorable Lynne Duryee presiding.
Opinion filed on June 17, 2009

Judges:

Before Lambden, J., Kline, P.J., and Richman, J.
Opinion by Lambden, J.

Counsel:

Attorneys for Plaintiffs and Appellants and for Objectors and Appellants - Jeffrey P. Spencer, Law Offices of Jeffrey P. Spencer. Jeffrey Wilens, Lakeshore Law Center. Edward J. Wynne and J.E.B. Pickett, Wynne Law Firm.

Attorneys for Defendant and Respondent - Margaret M. Grignon, John P. Zaimes, and Brian P. McKeever, Reed Smith LLP

Furton v. Herr, No. C058019

In a divorce matter, the trial court's order granting reconsideration is reversed, where although the trial court announced it was granting reconsideration on its own motion of a support order, it in fact improperly ordered a new trial.

Read the full decision in Furton v. Herr, No. C058019. [html]
Read the full decision in Fulton v. Herr, No C058019. [pdf]

Appellate Information:

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of El Dorado County, John J. Golden, Judge. Reversed.

Opinion filed on June 17, 2009

Judges:

Before SIMS, BLEASE, and ROBIE.

Opinion by Judge SIMS.

Counsel:

Law & Mediation Office of Teresa A. Stanley and Teresa A. Stanley for Appellant.

Law Offices of Dosh & Dosh, Ronald E. Dosh and Aaron B. Dosh, for Respondent.