Pending California Supreme Court Cases That MPP Is Tracking
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
© Copyright 2024