Pending California Supreme Court Cases That MPP Is Tracking
Attorney-Client ........................................................................................................................................................ 2
Civil Litigation and Commercial Law ...................................................................................................................... 2
Construction & Design ...........................................................................................................................................15
Employment ...........................................................................................................................................................18
Insurance ................................................................................................................................................................22
Products/Environmental ..........................................................................................................................................24
Case Index ..............................................................................................................................................................30
Updated on November 6, 2014
Page 1 of 32
Attorney-Client
Issue
Malpractice. Statute of Limitations.
Status
Case Information
Lee v. Hanley, S220775
In briefing
Does the one-year statute of limitations for Answer brief due December 3, 2014
actions against attorneys, Code Civ. Proc.,
227 Cal.App.4th 1295
§ 340.6, apply to a former client’s claim
mod. order
against an attorney for unearned attorney
fees advanced in connection with a
lawsuit?
Civil Litigation and Commercial Law
Issue
Status
Case Name & Court of Appeal Opinion
Setoffs and Non-Economic Damages. If
Waiting for opinion
Rashidi v. Moser, S214430
a jury awards the plaintiff in a medical
Argued October 7, 2014
219 Cal.App.4th 1170
Updated on November 6, 2014
Page 2 of 32
Issue
Status
Case Name & Court of Appeal Opinion
malpractice action noneconomic damages
against a healthcare provider defendant,
does Civil Code section 3333.2 entitle that
defendant to a setoff based on the amount
of a pretrial settlement entered into by
another healthcare provider that is
attributable to non-economic losses, or
does the statutory rule that liability for
noneconomic damages is several only (not
joint and several) bar such a setoff?
Arbitration. Preemption. Does the
Waiting for argument
Sanchez v. Valencia Holding Company,
Federal Arbitration Act (9 U.S.C. § 2), as
Fully briefed August 30, 2012
LLC, S199119
interpreted in AT&T Mobility LLC v.
201 Cal.App.4th 74
Concepcion (2011) 563 U. S. __, 131 S.Ct.
1740, preempt state law rules invalidating
mandatory arbitration provisions in a
consumer contract as procedurally and
substantively unconscionable?
Updated on November 6, 2014
Page 3 of 32
Issue
Status
Case Name & Court of Appeal Opinion
Dangerous Condition of Public
Waiting for argument
Cordova v. City of Los Angeles, S208130
Property (Gov’t. Code § 835) May a
Fully briefed July 1, 2013
212 Cal.App.4th 243
Attorneys’ Fee Motion Filed After A
Waiting for argument
Conservatorship of McQueen., S209376
Judgment Is Satisfied. Is a trial court
Fully briefed October 31, 2013
Nonpublished opinion
government entity be held liable if a
dangerous condition of public property
existed and caused the injuries plaintiffs
suffered in an accident, but did not cause
the third party conduct that led to the
accident?
award of statutorily-mandated fees and
costs incurred on appeal subject to the
Enforcement of Judgments Statutes (Code
Civ. Proc., § 685.040 et seq.) if the
statutory authority underlying the award is
the Elder Abuse Act (Welf. & Inst. Code,
§ 15600 et seq.)?
Updated on November 6, 2014
Page 4 of 32
Issue
Status
Case Name & Court of Appeal Opinion
Facial Constitutional Challenge To An
Waiting for argument
California Building Industry Assn. v. City
Ordinance. Standard of Judicial
Fully briefed February 20, 2014
of San Jose, S212072
Review. What standard of judicial review
216 Cal.App.4th 1373
applies to a facial constitutional challenge
to inclusionary housing ordinances that
require set asides or in-lieu fees as a
condition of approving a development
permit? (See San Remo Hotel L.P. v. City
& County of San Francisco (2002) 27
Cal.4th 643, 670.)
Scope of law enforcement’s duty to
Waiting for argument
(H.) B. v. County of San Bernardino,
cross-report and provide a follow-up
Fully briefed March 6, 2014
S213066
report of suspected child abuse.
Nonpublished opinion
(1) Does Penal Code section 11166,
subdivision (k), create a mandatory duty
requiring a law enforcement agency to
Updated on November 6, 2014
Page 5 of 32
Issue
Status
Case Name & Court of Appeal Opinion
cross-report to the relevant social services
agency whenever it receives a report of
known or suspected child abuse?
(2) If so, when is that duty triggered?
(3) Does Penal Code section 11166,
subdivision (a), apply to law enforcement
agencies that receive initial reports of
child abuse? (4) If so, what standard
should be applied to determine whether a
follow-up report is required?
Elder Abuse and Neglect. Outpatient
Waiting for argument
Winn v. Pioneer Medical Group, Inc.,
Care and Failure To Refer to a
Fully briefed March 4, 2014
S211793
Specialist. Does “neglect” within the
meaning of the Elder Abuse and
Dependent Adult Civil Protection Act
216 Cal.App.4th 875
(Welf. & Inst. Code, § 15657) include a
health care provider’s failure to refer an
elder patient to a specialist if the care took
Updated on November 6, 2014
Page 6 of 32
Issue
Status
Case Name & Court of Appeal Opinion
place on an outpatient basis, or must an
action for neglect under the Act allege that
the defendant health care provider had a
custodial relationship with the elder
patient?
Relief From Default & Code Civ. Proc.
Waiting for argument
Evan Zohar Construction & Remodeling,
§ 1008. Do the requirements of Code of
Fully briefed March 6, 2014
Inc. v. Bellaire Townhouses, LLC.,
Civil Procedure section 1008, subdivision
S210804
(b), which govern motions to renew
215 Cal.App.4th 277
previously denied motions, apply to
renewed motions under Code of Civil
Procedure section 473, subdivision (b), for
relief from default judgment?
Common Interest Developments.
Waiting for argument
Tract 19051 Homeowners Assoc. v. Kemp,
Attorneys Fees. Is a prevailing
Fully briefed April 1, 2014
S211596
homeowner entitled to attorney fees under
Unpublished opinion
Civil Code section 1354 in an action by
the homeowners association to enforce its
Updated on November 6, 2014
Page 7 of 32
Issue
Status
Case Name & Court of Appeal Opinion
governing documents as those of a
common interest development when the
homeowner prevailed because it was later
determined that the subdivision was not
such a development and its governing
documents has not been properly
reenacted?
Professional Negligence versus
Waiting for argument
Flores v. Presbyterian Intercommunity
Ordinary Negligence. (1) Does the one-
Fully briefed June 2, 2014
Hospital, S209836
year statute of limitations for claims under
213 Cal.App.4th 1386
the Medical Injury Compensation Act
(Code Civil Proc., § 340.5) or the two-year
statute of limitations for ordinary
negligence (Code Civil Proc., § 335.1)
govern an action for premises liability
against a hospital based on negligent
maintenance of hospital equipment [the
railings on a hospital bed]? (2) Did the
Updated on November 6, 2014
Page 8 of 32
Issue
Status
Case Name & Court of Appeal Opinion
injury in this case arise out of
“professional negligence,” as that term is
used in section 340.5, or ordinary
negligence?
Public and Media Access To Citations
Waiting for argument
State Dep’t of Public Health v. Superior
For Violations of Patient Care
Fully briefed June 25, 2014
Court, S214679
Standards. In the context of a request
219 Cal.App.4th 966
under the Public Records Act (Gov. Code,
§ 6250) for citations issued by the
mod. order
Department of Public Health to state
facilities housing the mentally ill and the
developmentally disabled, can the public
accessibility provisions for citations issued
under the Long-Term Care Act (Health &
Saf. Code, § 1417 et seq.) be reconciled
with the confidentiality provisions of the
Lanterman-Petris-Short Act (Welf. & Inst.
Code, § 5000 et seq.) and the Lanterman
Updated on November 6, 2014
Page 9 of 32
Issue
Status
Case Name & Court of Appeal Opinion
Developmental Disabilities Services Act
(Welf. & Inst. Code, § 4500 et seq.), and,
if so, how?
Real Estate. Short-sales and Anti-
Waiting for argument
Coker v. JP Morgan Chase Bank, N.A.,
Deficiency Protections. (1) Do the anti-
Fully briefed July 24, 2014
S213137
deficiency protections in Code of Civil
218 Cal.App.4th 1
Procedure section 580b apply to a
borrower who engages in a “short sale” of
real property when the lender approved the
sale and reconveyed its deed of trust to
facilitate the sale on the condition that the
borrower remain liable for any outstanding
balance on the loan following the sale? (2)
Does a borrower’s request that the creditor
release its security interest in real property
to facilitate a short sale result in a waiver
of the protection of the “security first” rule
Updated on November 6, 2014
Page 10 of 32
Issue
Status
Case Name & Court of Appeal Opinion
set forth in Code of Civil Procedure
section 726?
Five-Year Statute and Mediation. Was
Waiting for argument
Gaines v. Fidelity National Title Ins. Co.,
this action properly dismissed for the
Fully briefed August 5, 2014
S215990
failure to bring it to trial within five years,
222 Cal.App.4th 25
or should the period during which the
action was stayed for purposes of
mediation have been excluded under Code
of Civil Procedure section 583.340,
subdivision (b) or (c)?
Res Judicata. Joint and Several
Waiting for argument
DKN Holdings v. Faerber, S218597
Liability. Can parties who are jointly and
Fully briefed October 9, 2014
225 Cal.App.4th 1115
“Prevailing Party” For Purposes of
Waiting for argument
Desaulles v. Community Hospital of the
Costs Award. When plaintiff dismissed
Fully briefed October 15, 2014
Monterey Peninsula, S219236
severally liable on an obligation be sued in
separate actions?
her action in exchange for the defendant’s
Updated on November 6, 2014
Page 11 of 32
Issue
Status
payment of a monetary settlement, was she
Case Name & Court of Appeal Opinion
225 Cal.App.4th 1427
the prevailing party for purposes of an
award of costs under Coe of Civil
Procedure section 1032, subdivision
(a)(4), because she was “the party with a
net monetary recovery,” or was defendant
the prevailing party because it was “a
defendant in whose favor a dismissal is
entered”?
Anti-SLAPP. Attorneys Fees. If the trial Waiting for argument
court grants a special motion to strike
Fully briefed October 29, 2014
Barry v. State Bar of California, S214058
218 Cal.App.4th 1435
under Code of Civil Procedure section
425.16 on the ground that the plaintiff has
no probability of prevailing on the merits
because the court lacks subject matter
jurisdiction over the underlying dispute,
does the court have the authority to award
the prevailing party the attorney fees
Updated on November 6, 2014
Page 12 of 32
Issue
Status
Case Name & Court of Appeal Opinion
mandated by section 425.16, subdivision
(c)?
Anti-Slapp. Public Officials. Did votes
In briefing
by city officials to approve a contract
Answer brief due November 6, 2014
City of Montebello v. Vasquez, S219052
constitute conduct protected by Code of
226 Cal.App.4th 1084
Civil Procedure section 425.16 despite the
allegation that they had a financial interest
in the contract?
Foreclosure. Borrower’s Standing To
In briefing
Yvanova v. New Century Mortgage Corp.,
Challenge Assignment. In an action for
Opening brief due November 14, 2014
S218973
wrongful foreclosure on a deed of trust
226 Cal.App.4th 495
securing a home loan, does the borrower
have standing to challenge an assignment
of the note and deed of trust on the basis
of defects allegedly rendering the
assignment void?
Patient Privacy. Controlled Substances
Updated on November 6, 2014
In briefing
Lewis v. Superior Court, S219811
Page 13 of 32
Issue
Prescription Data. (1) When the Medical
Status
Case Name & Court of Appeal Opinion
Opening brief due November 17, 2014
Board of California investigates a
226 Cal.App.4th 933
consumer complaint against a physician
that is unrelated to the physician’s
prescription practices, do the physician’s
patients have a protected privacy interest
in the controlled substance prescription
data collected and submitted to the
California Department of Justice under
Health and Safety Code section 11165?
(2) If so, is disclosure of such data to the
Medical Board justified by a compelling
state interest?
Privacy. Public Records Act. Are
In briefing
City of San Jose v. Superior Court,
written communications pertaining to city
Opening brief due November 21, 2014
S218066
business, including email and text
225 Cal.App.4th 75
messages, which (a) are sent or received
by public officials and employees on their
Updated on November 6, 2014
225 Cal.App.4th 568c (mod.)
Page 14 of 32
Issue
Status
Case Name & Court of Appeal Opinion
private electronic devices using their
private accounts, (b) are not stored on city
servers, and (c) are not directly accessible
by the city, “public records” within the
meaning of the California Public Records
Act?
Statement of Decision. Is a trial court’s
In briefing
F.P. v. Monier, S216566
error in failing to issue a statement of
Reply brief due November 24, 2014
222 Cal.App.4th 1087
decision upon a timely request reversible
per se?
Construction & Design
Issue
Updated on November 6, 2014
Status
Case Information
Page 15 of 32
Single Family Residence Exception Under CEQA. Did
Set for argument
Berkeley Hillside Preservation v. City of
the City of Berkeley properly conclude that a proposed
December 2, 2014
Berkeley (Logan), S201116
project was exempt from the California Environmental
Quality Act (Pub. Resources Code, § 21000 et seq.) under
Los Angeles
the categorical exemptions set forth in California Code of
Fully briefed December
203 Cal.App.4th 656
Regulations, title 14, sections 15303, subdivision (a), and
17, 2012
(Modification order)
Design Immunity. Does a public entity establish the
Waiting for argument
Hampton v. County of San Diego, S213132
second element of design immunity under Government
Fully briefed April 14,
218 Cal.App.4th 286
Code section 830.6 – discretionary approval of design plans
2014
15332, and that the "Significant Effects Exception" set forth
in section 15300.2, subdivision (c), of the regulations did
not operate to remove the project from the scope of those
categorical exemptions?
– as a matter of law by presenting evidence that its design
plans were approved by an employee with the discretion to
do so, even if the plaintiff presents evidence that the design
at issue violated the public entity’s own standards?
Updated on November 6, 2014
Page 16 of 32
Real Estate Broker As Dual Agent. When the buyer and
In briefing
Horiike v. Coldwell Banker Residential
the seller in a residential real estate transaction are each
Answer brief due
Brokerage Co., S218734
independently represented by a different salesperson from
November 6, 2014
the same brokerage firm, does Civil Code section 2079.13,
subdivision (b), make each salesperson the fiduciary to both
225 Cal.App.4th 427
the buyer and the seller with the duty to provide undivided
loyalty, confidentiality and counseling to both?
Updated on November 6, 2014
Page 17 of 32
Employment
Issue
Status
Case Information
“On Call” Time. Are guards that defendants provide for
Waiting for opinion
Mendiola v. CPS Security Solutions,
construction site security entitled to compensation for all
Argued November 3,
S212704
2014
217 Cal.App.4th 851
nighttime “on call” hours, or may defendants deduct sleep
time depending on the structure of the guards’ working
shifts?
Sacramento
Fully briefed February 4,
2014
Honest Belief Defense. Reviewable Legal Error By
Waiting for opinion
Richey v. Autonation, Inc., S207536
Arbitrator. (1) Is an employer’s honest belief that an
Argued November 3,
210 Cal.App.4th 1516
employee was violating company policy or abusing medical
2014
leave a complete defense to the employee’s claim that the
employer violated the Moore-Brown-Roberti Family Rights
Act (Gov. Code §§ 12945.1, 12945.2)?
Updated on November 6, 2014
211 Cal.App.4th 701b (mod. order)
Sacramento
Fully briefed July 9,
Page 18 of 32
Issue
(2) Was the decision below to vacate the arbitration award
Status
Case Information
2013
in the employer’s favor consistent with the limited judicial
review of arbitration awards?
Dual Employment. Freeway Service Patrol Act. Can the
Set for argument
State ex rel. Dept. of California Highway
California Highway Patrol be considered the special
December 2, 2014
Patrol v. Superior Court, S214221
Los Angeles
220 Cal.App.4th 612
employer of a tow truck driver participating in the Freeway
Service Program?
Fully briefed June 27,
2014
Arbitration Agreement. Unconscionability. Is an
Waiting for argument
Baltazar v. Forever 21, Inc., S208345
employment arbitration agreement unconscionable for lack
Fully briefed November
212 Cal.App.4th 221
of mutuality if it contains a clause providing that either
20, 2013
party may seek provisional relieve in the courts and the
employer is more likely to seek such relief?
Recovery of Costs By Prevailing Defendant. Is a
Waiting for argument
Williams v. Chino Valley Independent Fire
prevailing defendant in an action under the Fair
Fully briefed April 2,
District, S213100
Updated on November 6, 2014
Page 19 of 32
Issue
Employment and Housing Act (Gov. Code, § 12900 et seq.)
Status
Case Information
2014
218 Cal.App.4th 73
Meaning of “Nature of the Work” Under Wage Order 4-
Waiting for argument
Kilby v. CVS Pharmacy, Inc./Henderson v.
2001 and 7-2001. Two California Wage Orders (IWC
Fully briefed July31,
JPMorgan Chase Bank NA, S215614
required to show that the plaintiff’s claim was frivolous,
unreasonable, or groundless in order to recover ordinary
litigation costs?
Wage Order 4-2001 § 14(A) and IWC Wage Order 7-2001 § 2014
14(A)), require an employer to provide “suitable seats” to
739 F.3d 1192 (Ninth Circuit Opinion &
Order Certifying Questions of Law)
employees “when the nature of the work reasonably permits
the use of seats.”
The Court agreed to address the following questions raised
by the Ninth Circuit regarding those wage orders:
“(1) Does the phrase ‘nature of the work’ refer to an
individual task or duty that an employee performs during the
course of his or her workday, or should courts construe
‘nature of the work’ holistically and evaluate the entire
range of an employee’s duties?
Updated on November 6, 2014
Page 20 of 32
Issue
Status
Case Information
(a) If the courts should construe ‘nature of the work’
holistically, should the courts consider the entire range of an
employee’s duties if more than half of an employee’s time is
spent performing tasks that reasonably allow the use of a
seat?
(2) When determining whether the nature of the work
‘reasonably permits’ the use of a seat, should courts
consider any or all of the following: the employer’s business
judgment as to whether the employee should stand, the
physical layout of the workplace, or the physical
characteristics of the employee?
(3) If an employer has not provided any seat, does a plaintiff
need to prove what would constitute ‘suitable seats’ to show
the employer has violated Section 14(A)?”
Updated on November 6, 2014
Page 21 of 32
Insurance
Issue
Consent To Assignment Clause. Are the
Status
Case Information
Waiting for argument
Fluor Corp. v. Superior Court, S205889
Fully briefed August 2, 2013
208 Cal.App.4th 1506
Reimbursement From Cumis Counsel or
Waiting for argument
Hartford Casualty Ins. Co. v. J.R.
Insured? After an insured has secured a
Fully briefed March 11, 2014
Marketing, L.L.C., S211645
limitations on assignment of third party
liability insurance policy benefits
recognized in Henkel Corp. v. Hartford
Accident & Indemnity Co. (2003) 29
Cal.4th 934 inconsistent with the
provisions of Insurance Code section 520?
judgment requiring an insurer to provide
216 Cal.App.4th 1444
independent counsel to the insured (see
San Diego Fed. Credit Union v. Cumis Ins.
Updated on November 6, 2014
Page 22 of 32
Issue
Status
Case Information
Society, Inc. (1984) 162 Cal.App.3d 358),
can the insurer seek reimbursement of
defense fees and costs it considers
unreasonable and unnecessary by pursuing
a reimbursement action against
independent counsel or can the insurer
seek reimbursement only from its insured?
Attorneys’ Fees Under Brandt. Is an
Waiting for argument
Nickerson v. Stonebridge Life Ins. Co.,
award of attorney fees under Brandt v.
Fully briefed June 4, 2014
S213873
Superior Court (1985) 37 Cal.3d 813
219 Cal.App.4th 188
[insurer liable for attorneys’ fees where
insurer’s tortious conduct forces insured to
retain counsel to obtain policy benefits]
properly included as compensatory
damages where the fees are awarded by the
jury, but excluded from compensatory
damages when they are awarded by the
trial court after the jury has rendered its
Updated on November 6, 2014
Page 23 of 32
Issue
Status
Case Information
verdict?
Products/Environmental
Issue
Status
Case Information
CEQA. Impact on Future Residents.
Waiting for argument
California Building Industry Association v.
Under what circumstances, if any, does the
Fully briefed March 17, 2014
Bay Area Air Quality Management
California Environmental Quality Act
District, S213478
(Pub. Resources Code, § 21000 et seq.)
218 Cal.App.4th 1171
require an analysis of how existing
environmental conditions will impact
future residents or users (receptors) of a
proposed project?
Asbestos & Duty To Warn of Known
Waiting for argument
Webb v. Special Electric Co., S209927
Hazards; Sua Sponte JNOV.
Fully briefed March 24, 2014
214 Cal.App.4th 595, mod. 214
Updated on November 6, 2014
Page 24 of 32
Issue
Status
(1) Does a supplier of raw asbestos to a
Case Information
Cal.App.4th 1386d
manufacturer of asbestos products owe a
duty to warn the manufacturer of hazards
already known to the manufacturer?
(2) May a trial court, sua sponte, treat
motions for nonsuit and a directed verdict
as a motion for JNOV, and then grant
JNOV without notice and before the time
expires to move for a new trial?
Settlements Arising Out Of Patent
Waiting for argument
Lawsuits. May a suit under the
In re Cipro Cases I & II, S198616
200 Cal.App.4th 442
Cartwright Antitrust Act (Bus. & Prof.
Code, § 16720 et seq.) be brought to
Fully briefed August 23, 2012
challenge “reverse exclusionary payments”
made by pharmaceutical manufacturers to
settle patent litigation with generic drug
producers and prolong the life of the
patents in question?
Updated on November 6, 2014
Page 25 of 32
Issue
Status
Case Information
Preemption. Food Labeling. Whether
Waiting for argument
Quesada v. Herb Thyme Farms, S216305
the Organic Foods Production Act of 1990
Fully briefed October 15, 2014
222 Cal.App.4th 642
State Reimbursement of Municipalities
Waiting for argument
Department of Finance v. Commission on
For Discharge Permit Requirements.
Fully briefed October 22, 2014
State Mandates, S214855
(7 U.S.C. § 6501 et seq.) preempts state
consumer lawsuits alleging that a food
product was falsely labeled "100%
Organic" when it contained ingredients that
were not certified organic under the
California Organic Products Act of 2003
(Food & Agr. Code, § 46000 et seq.;
Health & Saf. Code, § 110810 et seq.).
Are the requirements in the National
220 Cal.App.4th 740
Pollutant Discharge Elimination Systems
(NPDES) permits issued by the regional
mod. order
water quality control board state mandates
subject to reimbursement under article
XIIIB, section 6, subd. (b) of the state
Updated on November 6, 2014
Page 26 of 32
Issue
Status
Case Information
Constitution?
Component Parts Defense. Are
In briefing
Ramos v. Brenntag Specialties, Inc.,
negligence and strict liability claims by an
Answer brief due November 7, 2014
S218176
employee of a processing company against
224 Cal.App.4th 1239
a supplier of raw materials for injuries
allegedly suffered in the course of
processing those materials barred by the
component parts doctrine?
CEQA.
In briefing
Center for Biological Diversity v.
(1) Does the California Endangered
Reply brief due November 26, 2014
Department of Fish & Wildlife, S217763
Species Act (Fish & Game Code, § 2050 et
224 Cal.App.4th 1105
seq.) supersede other California statutes
that prohibit the taking of “fully protected”
species, and allow such a taking if it is
incidental to a mitigation plan under the
California Environmental Quality Act
(Pub. Resources Code, § 21000 et seq.)?
Updated on November 6, 2014
Page 27 of 32
Issue
Status
Case Information
(2) Does the California Environmental
Quality Act restrict judicial review to the
claims presented to an agency before the
close of the public comment period on a
draft environmental impact report?
(3) May an agency deviate from the Act’s
existing conditions baseline and instead
determine the significance of a project’s
greenhouse gas emissions by reference to a
hypothetical higher “business as usual”
baseline?
CEQA. Standard of Review.
In briefing
Sierra Club v. County of Fresno, S219783
Correlation Analysis. Adequacy of
Opening brief due December 2, 2014
226 Cal.App.4th 704
Mitigation Measures. (1) What standard
of review applies to a claim than an
Environmental Impact Report (EIR) lacks
sufficient information?
(2) Does CEQA require an EIR to
Updated on November 6, 2014
Page 28 of 32
Issue
Status
Case Information
correlate a project’s air emissions to
specific health impacts?
(3) What constitutes an adequate
“performance standard” that justifies
deferred mitigation?
Asbestos. “Take-home” Exposure.
If
an employer’s business involves either the
use or the manufacture of asbestos-
In briefing
Haver v. BNSF Railway Co., S219919
Answer brief due November 20, 2014
226 Cal.App. 4th 1104
(Haver)
226 Cal.App.4th 1376b [Mod. Order]
Answer brief due December 19, 2014
Kesner v. Superior Court, S219534
containing products, does the employer
owe a duty of care to members of an
employee’s household who could be
(Kesner)
226 Cal.App.4th 251
affected by asbestos brought home on the
employee’s clothing?
Updated on November 6, 2014
Page 29 of 32
Case Index
Cases
B.H. v. County of San Bernardino, S213066 .............................................................................................................................................. 5
Baltazar v. Forever 21, Inc., S208345 ...................................................................................................................................................... 19
Barry v. State Bar of California, S214058 ................................................................................................................................................ 12
Berkeley Hillside Preservation v. City of Berkeley (Logan), S201116 .................................................................................................... 16
California Building Industry Assn. v. City of San Jose, S212072 .............................................................................................................. 5
California Building Industry Association v. Bay Area Air Quality Management District, S213478 ...................................................... 24
Center for Biological Diversity v. Department of Fish & Wildlife, S217763 .......................................................................................... 27
City of Montebello v. Vasquez, S219052 ................................................................................................................................................. 13
City of San Jose v. Superior Court, S218066 ........................................................................................................................................... 14
Coker v. JP Morgan Chase Bank, N.A., S213137 .................................................................................................................................... 10
Conservatorship of McQueen., S209376 .................................................................................................................................................... 4
Cordova v. City of Los Angeles, S208130 ................................................................................................................................................. 4
Department of Finance v. Commission on State Mandates, S214855...................................................................................................... 26
Updated on November 6, 2014
Page 30 of 32
Desaulles v. Community Hospital of the Monterey Peninsula, S219236 ................................................................................................. 11
DKN Holdings v. Faerber, S218597 ......................................................................................................................................................... 11
Duran v. U.S. Bank National Assn., S200923 .......................................................................................................................................... 20
Evan Zohar Construction & Remodeling, Inc. v. Bellaire Townhouses, LLC., S210804 .......................................................................... 7
F.P. v. Monier, S216566 ........................................................................................................................................................................... 15
Flores v. Presbyterian Intercommunity Hospital, S209836 ........................................................................................................................ 8
Fluor Corp. v. Superior Court, S205889 ................................................................................................................................................... 22
Gaines v. Fidelity National Title Ins. Co., S215990 ................................................................................................................................. 11
Hampton v. County of San Diego, S213132............................................................................................................................................. 16
Hartford Casualty Ins. Co. v. J.R. Marketing, L.L.C., S211645............................................................................................................... 22
Haver v. BNSF Railway Co., S219919..................................................................................................................................................... 29
Horiike v. Coldwell Banker Residential Brokerage Co., S218734 ........................................................................................................... 17
In re Cipro Cases I & II, S198616 ............................................................................................................................................................ 25
Kesner v. Superior Court, S219534 .......................................................................................................................................................... 29
Kilby v. CVS Pharmacy, Inc./Henderson v. JPMorgan Chase Bank NA, S215614 ................................................................................ 20
Lee v. Hanley, S220775 .............................................................................................................................................................................. 2
Updated on November 6, 2014
Page 31 of 32
Lewis v. Superior Court, S219811 ............................................................................................................................................................ 13
Mendiola v. CPS Security Solutions, S212704 ........................................................................................................................................ 18
Nickerson v. Stonebridge Life Ins. Co., S213873 .................................................................................................................................... 23
Quesada v. Herb Thyme Farms, S216305 ................................................................................................................................................ 26
Ramos v. Brenntag Specialties, Inc., S218176 ......................................................................................................................................... 27
Rashidi v. Moser, S214430 ......................................................................................................................................................................... 2
Richey v. Autonation, Inc., S208536 ........................................................................................................................................................ 18
Sanchez v. Valencia Holding Company, LLC, S199119........................................................................................................................... 3
Sierra Club v. County of Fresno, S219783 ............................................................................................................................................... 28
State Dep’t of Public Health v. Superior Court, S214679 .......................................................................................................................... 9
State ex rel. Dept. of California Highway Patrol v. Superior Court, S214221 ......................................................................................... 19
Tract 19051 Homeowners Assoc. v. Kemp, S211596 ................................................................................................................................ 7
Webb v. Special Electric Co., S209927 .................................................................................................................................................... 24
Williams v. Chino Valley Independent Fire District, S213100 ................................................................................................................ 19
Winn v. Pioneer Medical Group, Inc., S211793 ......................................................................................................................................... 6
Yvanova v. New Century Mortgage Corp., S218973 ............................................................................................................................... 13
Updated on November 6, 2014
Page 32 of 32