Jump To Navigation

News

News

Top Headlines

Read More

Case Summaries

Elder Law

[12/05] AutoZone, Inc. v. Reyes
In an age-discrimination suit, jury verdict for plaintiff is reversed where: 1) the statements of a store manager were not evidence that age was a motivating factor in defendant's termination of plaintiff; and 2) defendant claimed, as a non-discriminatory reason for terminating plaintiff, that plaintiff had violated its sexual harassment policy, and plaintiff presented no evidence under which a reasonable jury could find that defendant treated him less favorably than any other employee who had violated that policy.

[11/12] James v. Richman
In a suit seeking Medicaid benefits, an injunction preventing defendant-Department of Public Welfare from denying benefits is affirmed where: 1) equitable relief was appropriate where plaintiff would be barred by the Eleventh Amendment from seeking monetary damages from the state; 2) plaintiff was not required to exhaust his state-level administrative remedies before seeking federal relief; and 3) a non-revocable, non-transferable annuity purchased by plaintiff's wife did not fit the statutory definition of an "available resource" for purposes of calculating Medicaid eligibility.

[06/07] Rath v. Carbondale Nursing and Rehab. Center, Inc.
Judgment for plaintiff on a claim for damages pursuant to the Nursing Home Care Act alleging various negligent acts by the defendant is affirmed where: 1) testimony as to defendant's negligence was proper even though defendant admitted to various acts of negligence since the information was relevant beyond the conclusions conceded by defendants; and 2) the fee award was reasonable in light of the contingency fee arrangement.

Read More

Family Law

[12/31] In re: Belcher
District court erred in allowing bankrupt husband to claim a homestead exemption in marital home because wife's name alone appeared on the title. Husband's potential equitable property interests in the home under divorce law, and his "possessory interest" in the family residence as spouse of the homeowner, were insufficient to permit him to claim the homestead exemption.

[12/23] Jose O. v. The Superior Court of San Diego County
In a family law matter, petition for review of decision denying petitioner-father reunification services is denied where father made no showing that the court abused its discretion by not providing reunification services for him after finding section 361.5(b)(6) applied.

[12/23] In re H.E.
In a family law case, dispositional orders declaring minor-daughters dependents of the juvenile court and maintaining them in foster care is affirmed over defendant-mother's claim there there was insufficient evidence to support the court's removal and reasonable effort findings.

Read More

Injury & Tort Law

[01/05] C.R. v. Tenet Healthcare Corp.
Trial court erred in sustaining demurrer to complaint against medical center for sexual harassment under Civil Code section 51.9 and for the negligent hiring, supervision and retention of nursing assistant who sexually assaulted and harassed plaintiff. Court holds that: 1) the judicially-noticed documents offered by defendant do not negate plaintiff's allegations that defendant directly or indirectly employed nursing assistant who sexually harassed plaintiff; 2) plaintiff was not required to allege the existence of a fiduciary relationship between herself and the medical center to state a viable claim for sexual harassment under section 51.9; and 3) complaint contains adequate allegations to hold the defendant corporation liable under section 51.9 for the sexual abuse of plaintiff by its employee.

[01/05] Cibula v. US
In a medical malpractice suit brought under the Federal Tort Claims Act, the district court erred by applying Virginia law and deciding not to place damages for future medical expenses into a reversionary trust. On remand, the court must apply California law, that being the state in which Plaintiffs were domiciled at the time of the underlying incidents, and determine whether the creation of a reversionary trust would impose liability on the government in the same manner and to the same extent as a private individual.

[12/04] Mercury Ins. Co. v. Pearson
Pedestrian who was struck by an uninsured motorist while crossing an intersection with his fiancée is not entitled to coverage under his fiancée's auto insurance policy. Judgment in favor of auto insurer is affirmed where the policy unambiguously extends uninsured motorist coverage to pedestrians only if they are "named insureds" or their spouses or relatives living in the same household.

Read More

Probate Trusts

[12/31] Boys and Girls Club of Petaluma v. Walsh
Probate court's modification of a charitable trust in 2007 pursuant to Probate Code section 15403 is affirmed where: 1) "all beneficiaries" of the charitable trust consented to the modification in accordance with section 15403(a); and 2) the broad discretion conferred up on the trustees did not constitute a "material purpose" which would prevent a probate court from modifying the charitable trust pursuant to section 15403(b).

[12/29] Estate of Shellenbarger
Denial of petition to exclude natural father's entitlement to distribution in decedent's estate is affirmed where a probate court may not, on principles of equity, disinherit a natural parent who abandons a child who later dies intestate.

[12/22] Estate of Bowles
Dismissal of plaintiff's civil complaint and order denying plaintiff's first amended Probate Code section 17200 petition are reversed where: 1) plaintiff had standing; 2) plaintiff's allegations brought him within the rule that a trust beneficiary can pursue a cause of action against a third party who actively participated in or knowingly benefits from a trustee's breach of trust; 3) the civil complaint was not a probate matter under section 17200; but 4) the civil complaint was related to the section 17200 petition and whether the related civil complaint should be heard in the probate court must be resolved pursuant to local superior court rules; and 5) the probate court erred in dismissing plaintiff's first amended section 17200 petition.

Read More

Associated Press text, photo, graphic, audio and/or video material shall not be published, broadcast, rewritten for broadcast or publication or redistributed directly or indirectly in any medium. Neither these AP materials nor any portion thereof may be stored in a computer except for personal and non-commercial use. Users may not download or reproduce a substantial portion of the AP material found on this web site. AP will not be held liable for any delays, inaccuracies, errors or omissions therefrom or in the transmission or delivery of all or any part thereof or for any damages arising from any of the foregoing.