Horseplay injury 522
April 10th, 2012 
admin Premises liability is another area of San-Diego-Personal-Injury-attorney.com
State Farm General Ins. Co. v Frake 197 Cal.App.4th 568 (2/7) (2011) Insured Frake struck and severely injured (groin nerve damage) his friend King in “consensual horseplay. San-Diego-Auto-Accident-lawyer ” Frake&King consented to $670K award. SF reserved rights and brought declaratory relief action, that acts were intentional and not covered accident. Stipulated judgment for Frake after court denied SF’s MSJ, reversed. [1] Term “accident”does not apply to deliberate conduct causing injury, even if no injury intended. San Diego personal injury attorney
Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off
Property damage and injury 521
April 10th, 2012 admin Premises liability is another area of San-Diego-Personal-Injury-attorney.com
Ulta Salon, Cosmetics & Fragrance, Inc. v Travelers Property Casualty Co. of America 197 Cal.App.4th 424 (2/3) (2011) Deubler sued Ulta for violating Prop 65 (H&SC § 25249.5), for civil penalties but not claiming injury. San-Diego-Auto-Accident-lawyer Insurance policy covered bodily injury and property damage. Ulta brought declaratory relief action, judgment for Traveler’s, affirmed. [1] No duty to defend in that Deubler did not seek covered damages, but only non-covered penalties. Possibility that Deubler might amend complaint did not create duty to defend. San Diego personal injury attorney
Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off
Arbitration policy 520
April 10th, 2012 admin Premises liability is another area of San-Diego-Personal-Injury-attorney.com
Zullo v Superior Court 197 Cal.App.4th 477 (6) (2011) 58-page employee handbook contained two ¶¶ arbitration policy. San-Diego-Auto-Accident-lawyer Petition to compel arbitration granted, reversed. [1] Arbitration policy procedurally unconscionable as an adhesion contract (“there is really no question that it is”), exacerbated by failure to furnish employees the arbitration (AAA) rules. [2] Substantively unconscionable in that (a) language only applies to employee-initiated lawsuits, binding against employee, only employee has a duty to respond (10 days), etc. (b) Provision has multiple defects indicating a systematic effort to impose arbitration as an inferior forum. Not possible to sever objectionable terms without adding language, which courts are not authorized to do. San Diego personal injury attorney
Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off
Peremptory juror challenge 519
April 10th, 2012 admin Premises liability is another area of San-Diego-Personal-Injury-attorney.com
People v. Rushing 197 Cal.App.4th 801 (2/3) (2011) Peremptory juror challenge, Batson/Wheeler not violated. San-Diego-Auto-Accident-lawyer Juror excused because (1) expressed some sympathy for gang membership, (2) her husband worked for post office (citing several reported cases); (3) possible bias against atheists where a witness or lawyer might be thought to be one. San Diego personal injury attorney
Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off
Indian tribe lawsuit 518
April 10th, 2012 admin Premises liability is another area of San-Diego-Personal-Injury-attorney.com
California Parking Services, Inc. v. Soboba Band of Luiseño lndians 197 Cal.App.4th 814 (4/2) (2011) Indian tribe’s contract with vendor had arbitration clause that excluded Appellant rule 48(c) which confers jurisdiction on state and federal courts. San-Diego-Auto-Accident-lawyer CPS moved to compel arbitration, denied, affirmed. [1] Indian tribes have sovereign immunity. Waiver is a matter of federal law, construed narrowly. Here, specific exclusion shows tribe refused waiver. Court has no jurisdiction either to enforce award or to compel arbitration itself. San Diego personal injury attorney
Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off
Quantum Cooking Concepts, Inc lawsuit 517
April 10th, 2012 admin Premises liability is another area of San-Diego-Personal-Injury-attorney.com
Quantum Cooking Concepts, Inc. v. LV Associates, Inc 197 Cal.App.4th 927 (2/1) (2011) Jury verdict for Quantum Ps&As. San-Diego-Auto-Accident-lawyer LV moved for new trial, but one-page Ps&As lacked any factual discussion or legal citations. New trial denied, affirmed. [1] CRC 3.1113(b) require motions be supported by facts, law, evidence, arguments, and discussion of statutes, cases, and textbooks. CRC 3.1113(a): court may construe an absence as an admission that the motion is not meritorious. 3.1113 applies to new trial motions. (And yet another criticism of appellate counsel’s inadequate record and briefs.) San Diego personal injury attorney
Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off
Defamation lawsuit 516
April 10th, 2012 admin Premises liability is another area of San-Diego-Personal-Injury-attorney.com
Cabrera v Alam 197 Cal.App.4th 1077 (4/3) (2011) HOA election: Alam and Cabrera exchanged accusations at HOA’s annual meeting. San-Diego-Auto-Accident-lawyer C sued A for defamation, and A files anti-SLAPP motion, denied, reversed. [1] A’s comment in public forum (open HOA meeting), concerning an issue of limited scope public interest–candidate qualifications–made against a limited purpose public figure, is a protected activity. HOAs are quasi-governmental entities paralleling powers, duties and burdens of municipal government. [2] On § 425.16 2d prong, C, by injecting herself into the public controversy becomes a limited public figure. C then needs to show malice (actual knowledge of falsity or reckless disregard) to state defamation claim, and C produced no such evidence on Anti-SLAPP motion. San Diego personal injury attorney
Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off
Insufficient paid contract 515
April 10th, 2012 admin Premises liability is another area of San-Diego-Personal-Injury-attorney.com
Castillo v Toll Bros. Inc 197 Cal.App.4th 1172 (1/1) (2011) Subcontractors’ employees sued contractor’s hirer for Lab C § 2810 wage-and-hour claims, alleging that hirer knowingly paid contract price insufficient to permit contractor to comply with Labor Code, here, the locally prevailing wages. Toll argued measure is minimum wage, not prevailing. MSJ for Toll granted, affirmed (mostly). San-Diego-Auto-Accident-lawyer [1] Where only violation is prevailing v. minimum wage, the latter is sufficient compliance. [2] Where claim is contract price was too low to satisfy other Labor Code requirements, and evidence showing violations, MSJ reversed. San Diego personal injury attorney
Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off
Musaelian v Adams lawsuit 514
April 10th, 2012 admin Premises liability is another area of San-Diego-Personal-Injury-attorney.com
Musaelian v Adams 197 Cal.App.4th 1251 (1/4) (2011) On fifth appeal (plus collateral case appeals), this one for sanctions against M’s lawyer Warner, remittitur awarded costs to M. M’s cost bill ordered taxed and attorney’s fee motion CCP sec 128.7 denied, affirmed. San-Diego-Auto-Accident-lawyer [1] Motion filed to identify the specific requested sanction or the target parties. Motion did not comply with CRC 3.1112(d), or even mention 128.7. [2] Sanctions not warranted in any case where Adams original, but finally unsuccessful motion not frivolous. [3] Trial court had discretion to halve the costs, as costs reasonably attributable to that party. San Diego personal injury attorney
Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off
SUV roof collapse 513
April 10th, 2012 admin Wrongful death is another area of San-Diego-Personal-Injury-attorney.com
Mansur v Ford Motor Co 197 Cal.App.4th 1365 (4/2) (2011) Mansur’s SUV rolled over, killing wife (roof collapse). San-Diego-Auto-Accident-lawyer Plaintiff’s expert described ways roof could be stronger and seat belt better designed. Consumers expectation test instruction CACI 1203 denied, holding 1203 applies when users’ everyday experience permits finding of defective design. Court also dismissed one juror who during trial viewed newsreport of other Ford rollover. Affirmed. [1] Consumer expectation requires evidence of product’s objective factors where lay jurors then apply their common knowledge. Although large amount of highly technical evidence on design, nothing in marketing or owner’s manual suggested objective features of its safety. Marketing the car as a “family vehicle” does not equate with showing objective features by which jurors’ common knowledge could find a defect. [3] substantial evidence supported “demonstrated reality” of juror’s inability to perform duty–read news story in violation of court’s admonition, which article affected juror’s impartiality. San Diego personal injury attorney
Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off