CA Pub. Decisions

1. PEOPLE v. PuriTec
   Aug 26, 2007
   California statutes that prohibit seller of a water treatment device from making performance or benefit claims that device affects health or safety of drinking water, unless the device has been certified by the state Department of Health Services, do not violate the federal Const…
2. THE PEOPLE v. PuriTec
   Aug 26, 2007
   A modification decision.
3. COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO v. STATE WATER RESOURCES CONTROL BOARD
   Aug 26, 2007
   Water quality orders by State Water Resources Control Board and regional board, establishing limitations for coliform effluent at wastewater treatment facility, were not inconsistent with basin plan. Under state water quality law and regulations, a water quality objective stated …
4. In re C.W.
   Aug 26, 2007
   A modification decision.
5. MICHELLE RA v. THE SUPERIOR COURT
   Aug 23, 2007
   A bystander may not recover for negligent infliction of emotional distress when she merely believes that it is more likely than not that her husband has been injured upon hearing a loud crash.<br />
6. HARRIS v. THE SUPERIOR COURT
   Aug 23, 2007
   In these original proceedings we hold that plaintiffs are not exempt from the overtime compensation requirements imposed by California law. Defendants are insurance companies. Plaintiffs are the companies claims adjusters, who seek damages based on overtime work for which they al…
7. ROHDE v. WOLF
   Aug 23, 2007
   Voicemail messages were protected communications for purposes of the anti SLAPP statute where they related to litigation contemplated by both plaintiff and defendant. Since such messages were also protected by the litigation privilege, plaintiff was unlikely to prevail in litigat…
8. THE PEOPLE v. POWEREX CORPORATION
   Aug 23, 2007
   A modification decision.
9. MANI BROTHERS REAL ESTATE GROUP v. CITY OF LOS ANGELES
   Aug 23, 2007
   Petitioners' repeated objections to project addendum voiced at various public meetings were sufficient to satisfy CEQA exhaustion requirement where agency did not provide for a public comment period or provide the public with notice that it was preparing an addendum. City&#39…
10. ALVARADO v. SELMACONVALESCENTHOSPITAL
    Aug 22, 2007
    Trial court did not abuse its discretion by abstaining from adjudicating Unfair Competition Law action seeking restitution and injunctive relief to require owners and operators of skilled nursing and intermediate care facilities to comply with certain statutory nursing hour requi…
11. CATALYST STRATEGIC DESIGN v. KAISER FOUNDATION HEALTH PLAN, INC
    Aug 22, 2007
    Alleged faxing of unsolicited advertisement did not violate Telephone Consumer Protection Act of 1991, pursuant to the act's "established business relationship" exception, where plaintiff and defendant had done business in the past, and plaintiff, while rejecting defe…
12. MARLIN v. AIMCO VENEZIA
    Aug 22, 2007
    Where tenants brought action seeking declaration of their rights with regard to possession of rental housing that landlord sought to remove from rental market under Ellis Act, and trial judge ordered that action be stricken under anti SLAPP statute, landlord's subsequent evic…
13. ESTRADA v. FEDEX GROUND PACKAGE SYSTEM Part I
    Aug 22, 2007
    Substantial evidence supported trial court's finding that, for purposes of determining commercial drivers' right to reimbursement for their expenses, the drivers were employees within the meaning of Labor Code Sec. 2802 where employer controlled virtually every aspect of …
14. ESTRADA v. FEDEX GROUND PACKAGE SYSTEM Part II
    Aug 22, 2007
    Substantial evidence supported trial court's finding that, for purposes of determining commercial drivers' right to reimbursement for their expenses, the drivers were employees within the meaning of Labor Code Sec. 2802 where employer controlled virtually every aspect of …
15. FRONTIER OIL CORPORATION v. RLI INSURANCE COMPANY PARTI
    Aug 22, 2007
    In determining which state's law to apply to the interpretation of an insurance policy, trial court must apply Civil Code Sec. 1646 which states that a contract is to be interpreted according to the law and usage of the place it is to be performed if the contract "indicat…
16. FRONTIER OIL CORPORATION v. RLI INSURANCE COMPANY PART II
    Aug 22, 2007
    In determining which state's law to apply to the interpretation of an insurance policy, trial court must apply Civil Code Sec. 1646 which states that a contract is to be interpreted according to the law and usage of the place it is to be performed if the contract "indicat…
17. FRONTIER OIL CORPORATION v. RLI INSURANCE COMPANY PARTIII
    Aug 22, 2007
    In determining which state's law to apply to the interpretation of an insurance policy, trial court must apply Civil Code Sec. 1646 which states that a contract is to be interpreted according to the law and usage of the place it is to be performed if the contract "indicat…
18. In re Marriage of JOHN and JEAN LAFKAS
    Aug 22, 2007
    Court of appeal has no jurisdiction to hear an appeal from an order on a bifurcated issue absent a certificate of probable cause from the trial court and an order from this court allowing the appeal on the bifurcated issue, and a purported appeal unaccompanied by those formalitie…
19. CLARK v. FIRST UNION SECURITIES
    Aug 22, 2007
    Where trial court ruled that certain claims were subject to compelled arbitration, but arbitrators ruled they were not arbitrable, trial court correctly reconsidered its first ruling and ordered that those claims be heard in the trial court.
20. PEOPLE v. RAMIREZ
    Aug 22, 2007
    Hearsay evidence relied on by a gang expert in forming his opinions is not "testimonial," so admission of the expert's opinion does not violate the Confrontation Clause.<br />