Case Updates

August 2024 Monty A. McIntyre, Esq.Helping Attorneys Get Excellent Results Publisher: California Case Summaries™:Monty publishes California Case Summaries™, with one-paragraph summaries, organized by legal topic, of every new civil case published each month, quarter and year in California, giving subscribers a competitive advantage and excellent results.Mediator, Arbitrator & Referee at ADR Services, Inc.:Monty handles matters in the areas of business, employment, insurance (bad faith, coverage, UIM), probate (trusts and estates), real property and torts (elder abuse, medical malpractice, personal injury, product liability and… Read more

Bailey alleged that a co-worker used a racial slur against her and that when she reported the incident, the human resources manager obstructed the filing of a formal complaint, engaged in a course of intimidating conduct, and threatened Bailey that she was “going to get it.” The Court held that a co-worker’s one-time use of a racial slur may be actionable harassment under the Fair Employment and Housing Act if it is sufficiently severe in light of the totality of the circumstances. The Court further held that a course of conduct that effectively seeks to withdraw an employee’s means of reporting and addressing racial harassment in the workplace is actionable as a retaliation claim under FEHA. Read more

Make UC a Good Neighbor v. The Regents of the University of Cal. (2024) _ Cal.5th _ , 2024 WL 2855736: The California Supreme Court reversed the Court of Appeal’s decision that had concluded that defendant’s approval of an environmental impact report (EIR) for a proposed housing project to be built on a site called People’s Park near the UC Berkeley campus, violated the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) because the EIR failed to consider the environmental impacts caused by “student-generated noise” such as “vocal noise from house parties and from late-night pedestrians,” and the EIR failed to adequately consider alternatives to the People’s Park location. After the Court of Appeal decision, the Legislature passed Assembly Bill No. 1307 (2023–2024 Reg. Sess.) (Assembly Bill 1307) as urgency legislation, effective immediately, which added sections 21085 and 21085.2 to the Public Resources Code. The new law provides that: (1) the effects of noise generated by project occupants and their guests on human beings is not a significant effect on the environment for residential projects for purposes of CEQA; and (2) institutions of public higher education, in an EIR for a residential or mixed-use housing project, are not required to consider alternatives to the location of the proposed project if certain requirements are met. Based upon this new law, the California Supreme Court concluded that none of plaintiff’s claims had merit and it reversed the Court of Appeal’s judgment. The new law applied to both the People’s Park housing project and the development plan, and the EIR was not inadequate for having failed to study the potential noisiness of future UC Berkeley students in connection with the project. (June 6, 2024.) Read more

Bristol SL Holdings v. CIGNA Health & Life (9th Cir. 23-55019 5/31/24) ERISA Affirming summary judgment for defendants, the court held that the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 preempted claims that a health plan administrator’s denial of reimbursements violated state law. Read more

A skilled nursing facility cannot compel arbitration of claims arising from a principal’s alleged maltreatment, pursuant to a contract signed by a health care agent. Read more

Alameda Health System is one of seven public entities that contract with the Alameda County Employees Retirement Association to provide retirement benefits to their employees. Read more

Code of Civil Procedure §1281.98 provides that if arbitration fees or costs “are not paid within 30 days after the due date, the drafting party is in material breach of the arbitration agreement, is in default of the arbitration, and waives its right to compel the employee or consumer to proceed with that arbitration as a result of the material breach.” Effective January 1, 2022, the Legislature amended §1281.98 to include a new sentence in subdivision (a)(2): “Any extension of time for the due date shall be agreed upon by all parties.” Hohenshelt’s former employer Read more

Failure to comply with the requirement in newly enacted Welfare and Institutions Code section 5350, subdivision (d)(2), that trial must begin within ten days of demand is discretionary, not mandatory, grounds for dismissal. Read more

Ciminelli v. United States, No. 21-1170 Issue: Whether the Second Circuit’s “right to control” theory of fraud—which treats the deprivation of complete and accurate information bearing on a person’s economic decision as a species of property fraud—states a valid basis for liability under the federal wire fraud statute, 18 U.S.C. § 1343. Read more

In this case, the Court of Appeal considered whether a DVTRO could only be modified within the confines of Code of Civil Procedure section 533. Read more