News

Case Summaries

Bankruptcy Law

[12/02] Trusted Net Media v. The Morrison Agency
In a bankruptcy case, decision affirming bankruptcy court's denial plaintiff's motion to dismiss is affirmed where: 1) 11 U.S.C. section 303(b) did not implicate subject matter jurisdiction; and thus 2) plaintiff's objection to the involuntary petition on grounds of non-compliance with section 303(b) was waived.

[11/24] Spencer v. Marshall
In a Chapter 13 bankruptcy matter, decision finding defendant was an equity purchaser and plaintiff was an equity seller and therefore the transaction came under the protection of the Home Equity Sales Contract Act (HESCA) is affirmed over claims of error that: 1) plaintiff's sale of property to individual as his assignee was outside the scope of HESCA; and 2) the sale fell under the exceptions to an equity purchaser set forth in section 1695.1 subdivisions (a)(4) and (a)(5).

[11/24] LPP Mortgage, Ltd. v. Brinley
In a bankruptcy matter, court order allowing trustee to revoke his abandonment of defendants' real property is affirmed where: 1) the trustee was entitled to relief under Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b)(5) and (6) "based on principles of equity, and the windfall to the debtors and the junior lienholders [if the abandonment were not revoked]; and 2) the bankruptcy court did not abuse its discretion in determining that the equities weighed in favor of revoking the abandonment.

Read More

Criminal Law & Procedure

[12/03] US v. Haj-Hamed
A sentence for distributing prescription drugs without a legitimate medical purpose is affirmed where, contrary to defendant's claims, the sentence was procedurally and substantively reasonable.

[12/03] US v. Lee
Convictions for murder for hire conspiracy and a separate conviction for being a felon in possession of a firearm are vacated in part, affirmed in part, and remanded in part where: 1) the district court's erroneous admission of detective's testimony recounting statement made by an alleged participant in the conspiracy who did not himself testify at trial was not harmless beyond a reasonable doubt; 2) the evidence presented at trial to support the conspiracy conviction, including the improperly admitted statement, was legally sufficient; and 3) the district court did not err with respect to the felon in possession of a firearm count.

[12/02] US v. Hunter
Individuals claiming to be victims under the Crime Victims' Rights Act of 2004 (CVRA) may not appeal from the alleged denial of their rights under that statute except through a petition for a writ of mandamus as set forth by 18 U.S.C. section 3771(d)(3).

Read More

Family Law

[12/02] County of Sacramento v. Llanes
Denial of defendant's motion to set aside a judgment of paternity as untimely is affirmed over claims of error that: 1) defendant's motion was timely; 2) plaintiff-county should have been estopped from asserting the motion was untimely because the California Department of Child Support Services (CDCSS) posted letters on its website stating that previously established fathers, such as defendant, had until December 31, 2006 to file a motion to set aside judgment of paternity; and 3) defendant relied on those letters in filing his motion on December 29, 2006.

[11/25] Tebo v. Tebo
In a suit alleging a civil conspiracy to have plaintiff involuntarily committed for mental treatment, summary judgment for defendants is affirmed where: 1) plaintiff did not produce evidence to show a agreement between the private and public defendants; 2) there was no factual dispute on the elements of a malicious-prosecution claim; 3) there was no basis for a per se negligence action against defendants-stepsons; 4) no material facts were in dispute as to whether defendants-doctors deprived plaintiff of due-process rights; 5) intentional infliction of emotional distress and malicious prosecution claims against defendants-doctors were not supported by evidence; and 6) defendants-doctors were entitled to immunity on negligence claims.

[11/25] In re I.I.
Order terminating mother's parental rights to her children under Welfare and Institutions Code section 366.26 is affirmed over claims of error that the juvenile court's finding that the children were adoptable was not supported by substantial evidence because: 1) there was no evidence of any other approved homes that were willing to take the children or children with their characteristics; 2) the children had severe behavioral problems; and 3) the children were part of a large sibling set.

Read More

Injury & Tort Law

[12/02] Brumfield v. Hollins
In a 42 U.S.C. 1983 suit brought by survivors of a man who hung himself while being held in a county jail, summary judgment for individual defendants on qualified-immunity grounds, and directed verdict in favor of defendant-county and individual defendants in their official capacity, are affirmed where: 1) defendant-sheriff was not subject to liability on theories of failure to promulgate policies on medical care or failure to supervise; 2) expert medical testimony was reasonably excluded; and 3) defendant-county was not liable as a municipality on either policy or deliberate-indifference theories.

[12/02] Greystone Homes, Inc. v. Midtec, Inc.
In an action brought by plaintiff-home builder against defendant-manufacturer for damage caused by plumbing fittings manufactured by defendant, summary judgment for defendant is reversed and remanded where: 1) a builder may recover from a product manufacturer for economic losses caused by the manufacturer's violation of the standards set forth in the Right to Repair Act through an equitable indemnity action; but 2) a builder may not recover for these losses through a direct negligence claim against the manufacturer.

[12/02] Java Oil Ltd. v. Sullivan
In a case brought by plaintiff-corporation pursuant to the Uniform Foreign Money-Judgments Recognition Act (UFMJRA) against attorney who represented client in a personal injury claim, judgment against attorney is affirmed over claims of error that the attorney fee awards entered by a court in Gibraltar: 1) constituted a penalty; 2) violated state public policy; and 3) should not have been recognized.

Read More