Case Summaries

Bankruptcy Law

[10/03] Ameriquest Mortgage Co. v. Nosek
In a bankruptcy matter, award of $250,000 for emotional distress and $500,000 in punitive damages for plaintiff mortgage company's violations of 11 U.S.C. section 1322(b)is vacated where there was no violation of either the Bankruptcy Code or defendant's plan.

More...

Commercial Law

[10/01] In re Heritage Bond Litig.
In a challenge to the scope of bar orders issued in securities class action settlements, bar orders forbidding all suits by non-settling defendant against settling defendants relating to or arising out of the class action are vacated as overly broad and remanded for modification because bar orders issued pursuant to Private Securities Litigation Reform Act section 4(f)(7)(A) or California Code of Civil Procedure section 877.6 can only bar claims for contribution, indemnity, and claims where the injury is the non-settling defendant's liability to the class action plaintiffs.

More...

Contracts

[09/29] Wachovia Ins. Servs., Inc. v. Toomey
Upon certified questions from the US Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit in a case arising from the termination of two employment contracts, the court answers that: 1) a settlement agreement between two parties that explicitly contains both an assignment of causes of action against a third party insurer and an immediate release of the insured on the same causes of action is valid; 2) the claim for breach of fiduciary duty arising from the relationship between the insurance broker and the insured involving allegations of failure to provide insurance coverage was also assignable as it is analogous to a cause of action for bad faith; and 3) the claim for negligent failure to procure insurance coverage should not have been dismissed as a matter of law, was assignable, and should have been submitted to the jury.

More...

Criminal Law & Procedure

[10/01] Huffman v. Texas
Conviction in a hit-and-run accident for failure to stop and render aid is affirmed where charging the jury in the disjunctive with respect to various statutory methods of committing the offense was not a violation of the constitutional requirement that the jury's verdict be unanimous.

More...

Dispute Resolution & Arbitration

[09/29] Safety Nat'l Cas. Corp. v. Certain Underwriters at Lloyd's, London
In a contract dispute between three insurers, denial of a motion to compel arbitration is reversed where the McCarran-Ferguson Act did not cause a state statute voiding arbitration agreements in insurance contracts to reverse-preempt the Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards. (Revised opinion)

More...

ERISA

[09/30] Golden Gate Rest. Ass'n v. City and County of San Francisco
In a challenge to municipally mandated employer health care spending requirements, summary judgment for plaintiff is reversed and the case remanded with instruction to enter summary judgment for defendant where the spending requirements are not preempted by ERISA because: 1) the spending requirements do not create an ERISA "plan" as defined by 29 U.S.C. section 1002(1); and 2) the spending requirements do not have an impermissible connection with employers' ERISA plans, or make impermissible reference to such plans.

More...

Education

[10/03] Caldwell v. Caldwell
In a Constitutional challenge to a website maintained by the University of California at Berkeley which portrayed evolutionary theory and religion as perhaps compatible, dismissal is affirmed where plaintiff, claiming harm by being exposed to government endorsed religious messages and made to feel like an outsider in public discourse, claimed only a generalized grievance and lacked standing to sue the government.

More...

Elder Law

[09/30] Wood v. Jamison
In a malpractice action brought by the trustee of 78-year old decedent for defendant-attorney's role in performing legal services for client who convinced decedent that he was her nephew, judgment for damages, attorney's fees and costs based on legal malpractice, breach of fiduciary duty and financial abuse of an elder is affirmed where: 1) defendant failed to advise decedent of a conflict of interest; 2) defendant failed to advise decedent the investment was not appropriate for her, or at least to refer her to an independent investment advisor; and 3) defendant obtained an undisclosed profit from the transaction.

More...

Evidence

[09/29] Deparvine v. Florida
Conviction and death sentence for first-degree murder are affirmed over claims of error regarding: 1) the erroneous admission of hearsay statements; 2) the sufficiency of the indictment; 3) the sufficiency of the evidence used to convict; 4) the introduction of five victim impact witnesses in the penalty phase; 5) a for-cause challenge of a juror; 6) the constitutionality of Florida's capital sentencing scheme; and 7) the sufficiency of the sentencing order.

More...

Family Law

[09/30] M.V. v. Superior Court of California
In a family law matter brought by mother seeking reunification with her infant after her incarceration and deportation for engaging in consensual sexual intercourse with a 15-year old boy, petition for a writ of mandate directing the trial court to vacate its order and to issue a new and different order continuing reunification services to a 12-month review is affirmed where the court erred in terminating reunification services and setting a .26 hearing by applying the 12-month review standard pursuant to section 366.21, subdivisions (f) and (g), instead of the six-month review standard pursuant to section 366.21, subdivision (e).

More...

Habeas Corpus

[10/03] Parker v. Bagley
In habeas proceedings following petitioner's convictions stemming from his abuse of his step-grandchildren, denial of habeas relief is affirmed where: 1) the untimeliness of petitioner's application to reopen was an adequate and independent state procedural ground for Ohio courts' denial of the application; and 2) thus, petitioner's procedural default was properly held to foreclose habeas relief on his claim for ineffective assistance of appellate counsel.

More...

Injury & Tort Law

[09/29] Wachovia Ins. Servs., Inc. v. Toomey
Upon certified questions from the US Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit in a case arising from the termination of two employment contracts, the court answers that: 1) a settlement agreement between two parties that explicitly contains both an assignment of causes of action against a third party insurer and an immediate release of the insured on the same causes of action is valid; 2) the claim for breach of fiduciary duty arising from the relationship between the insurance broker and the insured involving allegations of failure to provide insurance coverage was also assignable as it is analogous to a cause of action for bad faith; and 3) the claim for negligent failure to procure insurance coverage should not have been dismissed as a matter of law, was assignable, and should have been submitted to the jury.

More...

Landlord Tenant

[10/02] Guyden v. Aetna, Inc.
In a claim brought against former employer for terminating plaintiff's employment in violation of the whistleblower protection provision of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, dismissal of plaintiff's claim is affirmed where: 1) claims brought under the Sarbanes-Oxley Act are arbitrable; and 2) the specific arbitration process established by the arbitration agreement at issue provided plaintiff with an adequate opportunity to enforce her statutory rights.

More...