At the Lectern

JANUARY 25, 2024

The Sixth District Court of Appeal’s published opinion in the case resolved several issues and Justices Liu and Evans didn’t explain why they wanted to hear the case, so the reason for their dissenting votes is not entirely clear (see here ). Holmes, McClain and Newborn (2022) 12 Cal.5th Salazar (2023) 15 Cal.4th

Law School 45

Law School Statute Court Laws 45

At the Lectern

SEPTEMBER 14, 2023

Division Four found the plaintiffs had adequately pleaded common law and statutory taxpayer claims, rejecting the trial court’s reasoning and other alternative arguments why the taxpayers couldn’t sue. Banks (2015) 61 Cal.4th Clark (2016) 63 Cal.4th Strong (2022) 13 Cal.5th 2023) 14 Cal.5th

Demurrer 85

Demurrer Court Technology Felony 85

At the Lectern

FEBRUARY 15, 2024

2023) 14 Cal.5th 2023) 15 Cal.5th Superior Court (2023) 15 Cal.5th The court issued an order to show cause in response to the habeas corpus petition in In re Green. Uber Technologies, Inc. 5th 1104 rather than the U.S. Supreme Court’s in Viking River Cruises, Inc. Moriana (2022) 596 U.S. In re Kieran S.

Diligence 45

Diligence Court Depositions Technology 45

At the Lectern

MAY 28, 2022

Perez (2020) 9 Cal.5th Valencia (2021) 11 Cal.5th Why did the court rule on a non-urgent petition for review on a non-conference day? The decision followed the Supreme Court’s grant-and-hold of an earlier opinion in the case ( here ) and the court’s disapproval of that opinion. twice, first in People v.

Court Rules 49

Court Rules Court 49

At the Lectern

APRIL 13, 2023

Division Four has now been directed to “vacate its order denying the petition for writ of mandate and to issue an order to show cause why petitioner is not entitled to the relief requested.” Delgadillo (2022) 14 Cal.5th Delgadillo (2022) 14 Cal.5th 5th 135, 155).” challenge in the trial court.”

Court 45

Court Laws 45

At the Lectern

AUGUST 10, 2022

In March, the court directed supplemental briefing on these questions: “(1) Does Cal. XIII C, § 1, subdivision (e)(4) apply to the fees paid under the waste management contracts at issue in this case, and if so, why? (2) The court granted review in August 2020. Horvitz & Levy filed an amicus curiae brief in the case.

Calendaring 49

Calendaring Contract Court 49

At the Lectern

APRIL 28, 2022

The court granted review in In re Seri and transferred the case back to the First District, Division Three, with directions to have a district attorney “show cause why petitioner’s continued confinement in the county jail does not violate his constitutional and statutory rights ( Jackson v. 715; In re Davis (1973) 8 Cal.3d

Court 49

Court Statute Court Rules Attorney 49

At the Lectern

AUGUST 16, 2023

It’s been nearly 100 years since the court has explained a ruling on a clemency recommendation request ( In re Billings (1930) 210 Cal. 669), so it’s unclear why Newsom was successful for Wong and Ford when Brown wasn’t. would make [Wong and Ford] eligible for.

Court 76

Court Felony Legal Legal 76

At the Lectern

OCTOBER 14, 2022

” (The opinion even explains why it hyphenates “co-tenancy”: “because that is how the parties spell it.”) Gutierrez (2014) 58 Cal.4th Tran (2022) 13 Cal.5th 29; see also Cal. Romero (1994) 8 Cal.4th Duvall (1995) 9 Cal.4th Romero (1994) 8 Cal.4th See People v.

Court 60

Court Prima Facie Case Statute Attorney 60

At the Lectern

MARCH 11, 2022

” The First District, Division Three, Court of Appeal’s published opinion , applying the Supreme Court’s landmark decision in In re Humphrey (2021) 11 Cal.5th Stamps (2020) 9 Cal.5th Lewis (2021) 11 Cal.5th I, § 12, subd. (b).)” ” It was the defendant who petitioned for review. 5th 135, 155-156).”

Court 53

Court Statute Litigation Litigating 53

At the Lectern

NOVEMBER 10, 2022

Any renewed request should specifically address whether petitioner is indigent and why he believes appointment of counsel is necessary to preserve his right of access to the courts.” Cause is to be shown “why petitioner is not entitled to relief under McCoy v. Bloom (2022) 12 Cal.5th Louisiana (2018) 584 U.S.

Demurrer 40

Demurrer Court 40

At the Lectern

MARCH 16, 2022

Healthworks Medical Group , a federal appeals court panel wants the Supreme Court to answer, “Does California’s Fair Employment and Housing Act, which defines ‘employer’ to include ‘any person acting as an agent of an employer,’ Cal. ” A district court dismissed the plaintiffs’ complaint.

Court 58

Court Legal Legal Laws 58

At the Lectern

MARCH 16, 2023

” In its landmark In re Humphrey (2021) 11 Cal.5th County of Los Angeles (1974) 12 Cal.3d Romero (1994) 8 Cal.4th Rules of Court, rule 8.528(d); In re Benoit (1973) 10 Cal.3d In re Bell (2007) 42 Cal.4th Delgadillo (2022) 14 Cal.5th limited to actions for malicious prosecution? See Sullivan v.

Felony 40

Felony Court Construction Statute 40

At the Lectern

FEBRUARY 2, 2023

2018) 5 Cal.5th AMN Services, LLC (2021) 11 Cal.5th One justice wrote a concurring opinion “to explain why I believe the majority’s decision today is a clear departure from See’s Candy. and more fully explain why that departure is appropriate under current California law.” Starbucks Corp. Economic loss rule.

Demurrer 45

Demurrer Contract Tort Entertainment 45

Patently O

OCTOBER 24, 2022

” The case here offers another example of why Inter Partes Review (IPR) proceedings are a godsend for accused infringers. .” Rothy’s, Inc. Birdies, Inc. , 21-2438 (N.D.

Construction 90

Construction Court 90

At the Lectern

FEBRUARY 2, 2024

Hanley (2015) 61 Cal.4th Stamps (2020) 9 Cal.5th Canizales (2019) 7 Cal.5th On the other hand, the Second District, Division Three, in Roger Cleveland Golf Co., Krane & Smith, APC (2014) 225 Cal.App.4th 4th 660, disapproved on another ground in Lee v. 4th 1225, held section 335.1 provided the applicable limitations period.

Statute 45

Statute Attorney Court Litigation 45

At the Lectern

NOVEMBER 18, 2021

The issue concerns allowable reimbursements to healthcare providers who serve low income patients under the Medicaid/Medi-Cal program. does not automatically make the associated costs reimbursable under Medicare (or Medi-Cal), even if they provide a benefit for the recipient.” City of Upland (2017) 3 Cal.5th ”

Punitive Damages 40

Punitive Damages Court Healthcare Laws 40

At the Lectern

MARCH 24, 2022

See In re Shaputis (2011) 53 Cal.4th 4th 192; In re Lawrence (2008) 44 Cal.4th 4th 1181; In re Pugh (2012) 205 Cal.App.4th 4th 260, 266; but see In re Butler (2014) 231 Cal.App.4th 4th 1521, 1533.)” ” Division Four had summarily denied the petition. VI, section 18 (e).) Criminal case grant-and-holds.

Misdemeanor 56

Misdemeanor Court Statute Government 56

At the Lectern

JUNE 23, 2022

” (11 Cal.5th 5th 135, 143), it specifically left unresolved an issue regarding the interpretation of two possibly conflicting state constitutional provisions. Yesterday, the court indicated the time for addressing the question — at least in the Courts of Appeal — is approaching. I, § 12, subd. (b));

Felony 49

Felony Court Government 49

At the Lectern

NOVEMBER 2, 2023

Victory Woodworks (2023) 14 Cal.5th Superior Court (2023) 15 Cal.5th ” The Supreme Court denied review in the appeal. Superior Court , which had been waiting for the July decision in Kuciemba v. Other grant-and-hold disposals. The court dismissed review in four cases that had been holding for the September opinion in Camacho v.

Healthcare 45

Healthcare Court Felony Attorney 45

Patently O

FEBRUARY 2, 2023

I note a couple of the issues below: Time to Trial : The appellate panel indicated that the likelihood of a speedy resolution in one jurisdiction versus another should not be given any regard in the convenience analysis unless the parties particularly justify why a speedy trial is important. As such, the fact that W.D.Tex.

Manufacturing 56

Manufacturing Court Attorney 56

At the Lectern

APRIL 27, 2021

The 2019 article said that Newsom was “considering commuting death sentences as ‘a next step’ once state Supreme Court justices explain why they blocked 10 non-death commutations sought by former Gov. Jerry Brown” in 2018. Link added.).

Court 58

Court Felony 58

At the Lectern

SEPTEMBER 23, 2022

and explain why we respectfully decline to adopt any of the three previously formulated rules.” Strong (2022) 13 Cal.5th Division Two reported that “California courts have staked out three different rules for assessing whether a defective initial inquiry is harmless” and then said, “we propose a fourth rule.

Court 45

Court Court Rules 45

At the Lectern

SEPTEMBER 29, 2021

Why is secrecy the default on gubernatorial clemency recommendation requests? Rules of Court, rules 2.550 (d)-(e), 8.46 (d)(6).). Links added.). We can’t tell from the court’s docket entries what documents are now available and what documents remain confidential. Free speech groups ask high court to open clemency records”.

Court 49

Court Felony Court Rules 49

At the Lectern

AUGUST 11, 2022

The court granted review in In re Grier and ordered the First District, Division Two, which had summarily denied a habeas corpus petition, to issue an order to show cause “why petitioner is not entitled to relief on the ground he received ineffective assistance of counsel at trial.” Romero (1994) 8 Cal.4th Duvall (1995) 9 Cal.4th

Prima Facie Case 49

Prima Facie Case Punitive Damages Court Cause of Action 49

At the Lectern

FEBRUARY 17, 2022

Lewis (2021) 11 Cal.5th Gentile (2020) 10 Cal.5th ” The appellate court had summarily denied the habeas petition, but issued a detailed order explaining its reasoning. Criminal case grant-and-holds : There were four criminal case grant-and-holds , all holding for a decision in People v. Strong (see here ). Lewis (see above).

Statute 49

Statute Litigation Litigating Court 49

At the Lectern

JANUARY 11, 2024

Bird (2018) 5 Cal.5th ” The Supreme Court barely denied review in Quality Education ; three justices (Justices Ming Chin, Goodwin Liu, and Mariano-Florentino Cuéllar) voted to grant and Justices Liu and Cuéllar wrote separate statements explaining why the court should have heard the case. School COVID policies.

Education 49

Education Demurrer Court Attorney 49

Attorney at Work

JANUARY 12, 2022

In his book, “ A World Without Email ,” Cal Newport explains that the human brain simply isn’t optimized to jump between “executing work tasks” and “managing an always-present, ongoing, and overloaded electronic conversation about those tasks.” The Trouble With Spending Too Much Time in Your Inbox. Illustration ©iStockPhoto.com.

Lawyer 128

Lawyer Lawyers Law Firm Law Firms 128

Constitutional Law Reporter

JUNE 5, 2023

While the argument was ultimately unsuccessful, the justices did not agree on why. Facts of the Case The case centered ona California law known as Proposition 12, which forbids the in-state sale of whole pork meat that comes from breeding pigs (or their immediate offspring) that are “confined in a cruel manner.” Health & Safety Code Ann.

Laws 52

Laws Court Constitutional Law Court Decisions 52

At the Lectern

NOVEMBER 30, 2023

” Often when Judicial Council actions are involved, the Chief Justice and the associate justice who are members of the Council (Cal. 6 (a)) recuse themselves (see, e.g., here , here , here , and here ), but Council members Chief Justice Patricia Guerrero and Justice Carol Corrigan were not recused. False or newly discovered evidence.

Court 45

Court Attorney Laws 45

At the Lectern

MARCH 11, 2021

The appellate court was directed to “issue an order to show cause why petitioner is not entitled to the relief requested, based on his claim that the prosecution failed to prove a policy governing the opening of closed containers during an inventory search. (See Williams (1999) 20 Cal.4th See People v. 4th 119, 138.)”

Court 49

Court Felony Government 49

The Estrin Report

MAY 12, 2023

In addition to my work at Sidley Austin, I serve on the board of Cal State East Bay’s executive Big Data Program, where I contribute my knowledge and experience to help shape the future of data science education. 9.    Let’s address the disrupters here: Why should legal professionals dissuade firms from using AI?

Document Review 243

Document Review Legal Technology Solution Technology Legal 243

At the Lectern

JANUARY 20, 2022

Also, the petition for review followed the summary denial by the First District, Division Two, of a writ petition and neither the Supreme Court’s nor the Court of Appeal’s docket discloses why the writ petition was filed. Lewis (2021) 11 Cal.5th What about the reply brief? : In People v. 620 (Stats.

Court 49

Court Laws 49

At the Lectern

FEBRUARY 10, 2022

Hoffman , the court ordered the First District, Division One, to vacate its dismissal of the defendant’s appeal and “to show cause why (1) the order is not appealable under the collateral rule doctrine, and (2) the relief sought in the petition for review should not be granted.” Lewis (2021) 11 Cal.5th

Court 56

Court Statute Court Decisions Laws 56

At the Lectern

DECEMBER 10, 2022

Doe (2022) 12 Cal.5th After requesting and receiving an informal response to the petition from the Court of Appeal, the Supreme Court yesterday issued an alternative writ directing Division Two “(i) to vacate its. ” The same day, the Court of Appeal changed the reply brief due date to December 16.

Court 45

Court Calendaring Drafting Statute 45

At the Lectern

SEPTEMBER 16, 2022

Strong (2022) 13 Cal.5th New-legislation remand : The court granted a pro per’s petition for review in In re Wade and transferred the case back to the Third District for issuance of an “order to show cause why petitioner is not entitled to a new sentencing hearing in light of Senate Bill No. ” (Link added.)

Court 56

Court Statute Cause of Action Laws 56

At the Lectern

MARCH 18, 2021

Superior Court (2018) 4 Cal.5th San Gabriel Transit , which was a grant-and-hold for Vazquez v. Jan-Pro Franchising International, Inc. where the court in January held that its 2018 decision in Dynamex Operations West, Inc. 5th 903 applies retroactively to all cases not final when Dynamex became final.

Court 49

Court Construction Finance Statute 49