Tried, Tested & Triumphant: Khashayar Law Group Secures Position as One of Southern California’s Top... 7 Ways to Make Billing More Effective: Lawyers may practice in different areas of the law and serve a wide range of clients, but... Protecting Your Firm from Ransomware: Ransomware attacks are affecting every type of business in America, and law firms are no... 5 Things to Ask Before You Say Yes To a Speaking Gig: Most professionals have a complicated relationship with public speaking—particularly if... 3 Biggest Leadership Mistakes People Make Today: One of the best leadership qualities that a manager can have is the ability to build up... California Case Summaries Civil™.: Organized Succinct Summaries of Some New CaliforniaCivil Cases - CALIFORNIA SUPREME COURT... Convert Unhappy Clients into Fans: Clients can become upset with us for many reasons, some of which are within our control,... Community News – August 2017: A San Francisco federal judge has appointed CaseyGerry’s managing partner David S.... DLTS Law. From the Ashes of the Recession.: D’Egidio Licari Townsend & Shah, APC’s unusual beginningsspark evolution of... How to Create an Email Law Alert. Powerful Marketing Tool Replaces Printed Newsletters.: Thanks to email, you can now write and distribute a weekly Law Alert without buying a...
Cole Casey - small banner

McIntyre’s California Alert. Organized Succinct Summaries

CALIFORNIA COURTS OF APPEAL

Arbitration

Anaheim Union High School District v. American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees, Local 3112, AFL-CIO (2013) _ Cal.App.4th _ , 2013 WL 6909431: The Court of Appeal affirmed the trial court’s judgment confirming an arbitration award in favor of the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees, Local 3112, AFL-CIO (the Union). Because the Anaheim Union High School District (District) had no statutory right under Education Code sections 45308 and 45117 to reduce a classified employee’s work year in lieu of a layoff for lack of funds — without complying with the collective bargaining agreement — the arbitrator did not exceed his powers in ruling that the District violated the collective bargaining agreement. (C.A. 4th, filed December 16, 2013, published January 3, 2014.)

Attorney Fees

Cardinale v. Miller (2014) _ Cal.App.4th _, 2014 WL 68095: The Court of Appeal affirmed the trial court’s order granting attorney fees. California Code of Civil Procedure section 685.040 does not limit recovery of fees to only fees awarded against the original judgment debtor. Rather, it imposes two requirements before a motion for an award of postjudgment attorney fees may be awarded as costs: (1) the fees must have been incurred to ‘enforce’ a judgment; and (2) the underlying judgment had to include an award for attorney fees pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 1033.5, subdivision (a)(10)(A). While in the usual scheme of things, the target of a fee motion under section 685.040 is presumably the original judgment debtor, the Legislature did not so restrict the provision’s scope. The statute by its terms is broad enough to encompass fees expended to enforce a judgment against third parties who conspired with the judgment debtor to evade its enforcement.(C.A. 1st, January 8, 2014.)

Civil Procedure

CertainTeed Corporation v. Superior Court (Hart) (2014) _ Cal.App.4th _ : The Court’s ability to allow additional time for depositions applies to both the seven hours of total testimony allowed in Code of Civil Procedure section 2025.290(a) and the 14 hours of testimony allowed in section 2025.290(b)(3). The trial court, however, retains the discretion to limit a deposition in the interests of justice. (C.A. 2nd, January 8,2014.)
Market Lofts Community Association v. 9th Street Market Lofts, LLC (2014) _ Cal.App.4th _ , 2014 WL 47016: The Court of Appeal reversed the trial court’s order sustaining a demurrer without leave to amend. The trial court erred in finding the homeowners association lacked standing to assert claims against developers regarding parking rights. (C.A. 2nd, January 7, 2014.)

Employment/Labor

Anaheim Union High School District v. American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees, Local 3112, AFL-CIO (2013) _ Cal.App.4th _ , 2013 WL 6909431: See summary above under Arbitration.
Quezada v. City of Los Angeles (2014) _ Cal.App.4th _ , 2014 WL 60330: The Court of Appeal affirmed the trial court’s summary judgment for defendant in a case by police officers alleging violations of their rights under the Public Safety Officers Bill of Rights (POBRA) (Government Code sections 3300-3313) and the Bane Act (Civil Code section 52.1) during an investigation of their conduct shooting their guns while off duty and after drinking. The trial court properly granted summary judgment. POBRA was not violated because plaintiffs were ordered on duty, given overtime pay, allowed to eat, drink, use the restroom as needed, and make phone calls. The police department read plaintiffs their Miranda rights; plaintiffs had an employee representative with them at all phases of the investigation; and the department was permitted to change the duties of the officers during the investigation. The seriousness of the incident required the police department to conduct the investigation immediately. It took police four hours to process the crime scene. The police department did not violate the Bane Act because plaintiffs were not threatened with violence, the searches of plaintiffs’ vehicles were not unlawful, and plaintiffs’ right to an attorney was not violated because plaintiffs refused to waive their Miranda rights and POBRA does not guarantee an officer an attorney in an administrative investigation. (C.A. 2nd, January 8, 2014.)

Government

Save The Plastic Bag Coalition v. City and County of San Francisco (2014) _ Cal.App.4th _ , 2013 Westlaw 6909479: The Court of Appeal affirmed the trial court’s denial of a petition for writ of mandate by petitioner seeking to invalidate a 2012 ordinance expanding existing restrictions on the use of check out bags. Petitioner failed to establish that the City erred by concluding that the 2012 ordinance was categorically exempt from CEQA. The ordinance was not preempted by the California Retail Food Code, Health and Safety Code section 113700 et seq. (C.A. 1st, filed December 10, 2013, published January 3, 2014.)

Real Estate (CEQA)

Market Lofts Community Association v. 9th Street Market Lofts, LLC (2014) _ Cal.App.4th _ , 2014 WL 47016: See summary above under Civil Procedure.
Save The Plastic Bag Coalition v. City and County of San Francisco (2014) _ Cal.App.4th _ , 2013 Westlaw 6909479: See summary above under Government.
See U.S. Supreme Court opinions at: http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/opinions.aspx • See 9th Cir. opinions at: http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/opinions/ • See Ca. opinions at: http://www.courts.ca.gov/opinions.htm

Monty A. Mcintyre

Monty A. McIntyre follows his passions for the law and serving others by serving as a mediator, arbitrator and motion referee to help individuals, businesses and lawyers obtain rapid, reasonable resolution of disputes. He is also the Publisher of McIntyre’s California Civil Law Update and can be reached at 619-990-4312 or monty.mcintyre@gmail.com.

More Posts

Digg This
Reddit This
Stumble Now!
Buzz This
Vote on DZone
Share on Facebook
Bookmark this on Delicious
Kick It on DotNetKicks.com
Shout it
Share on LinkedIn
Bookmark this on Technorati
Post on Twitter
Google Buzz (aka. Google Reader)
en.pdf24.org    Send article as PDF   

Filed Under: Practice Management

About the Author: Monty A. McIntyre follows his passions for the law and serving others by serving as a mediator, arbitrator and motion referee to help individuals, businesses and lawyers obtain rapid, reasonable resolution of disputes. He is also the Publisher of McIntyre’s California Civil Law Update and can be reached at 619-990-4312 or monty.mcintyre@gmail.com.

RSSComments (0)

Trackback URL

Leave a Reply

  • Polls
    Sorry, there are no polls available at the moment.