CA Unpub Decisions

PNC Bank, acting as trustee of the Ott Testamentary Trust, filed a petition for instructions seeking confirmation that it should distribute a portion of the trust principal to two of the decedent's great grandchildren, Charles Manteuffel Jr. and Sabrina Manteuffel. Several trust beneficiaries objected to the petition, arguing that the Manteuffel children were not entitled to any portion of the trust. The parties agreed to submit the issue to the court based solely on the text of the trust instrument.
The trial court ruled that although the Manteuffel children had an interest in a portion of the trust's principal, they were not entitled to that portion of the trust until both of the following had occurred: (1) both of the children's great aunts, Elizabeth Replogle and Charlotte Shepard, had died; and (2) at the time of death of the last of the two aunts, at least one of the aunts had surviving issue. The court further ruled, however, that until Elizabeth and Charlotte both died, the Manteuffel children were entitled to receive income from the portion of the trust that they might later inherit. The objectors filed a timely appeal. We affirm in part, reverse in part and remand for further proceedings.

Cynthia Arias and Johnny Reed Beaudion were involved in a car crash. A jury found Beaudion 75 percent at fault and Arias 25 percent at fault. The jury awarded Arias damages for past medical care and pain and suffering, but awarded no damages for future medical care. The trial court granted Arias's motion for a new trial on the grounds of juror misconduct, inadequate damages, and insufficiency of the evidence. Beaudion appealed on the sole ground that the order granting a new trial did not contain a sufficient statement of reasons. Arias filed a precautionary cross-appeal. We affirm the order granting a new trial and dismiss Arias's cross-appeal as moot.

AJ, a show horse, underwent surgery at Equine Medical Center and suffered a torn trachea during the insertion or removal of an anesthesia tube. He later developed a severe case of laminitis and was euthanized.
Stephanie Brownstein, AJ's owner, sued Baker Equine Hospital, Inc. (Baker), as the owner of Equine Medical Center and three individual veterinarians, alleging professional negligence. A jury returned a special verdict finding that Baker was negligent but the individuals were not negligent. The trial court entered a judgment on the verdict awarding Brownstein $46,332.32 in damages. The court denied Baker's motions for a new trial and for judgment notwithstanding the verdict. Baker appeals the judgment and the order denying its motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict.
Baker contends there is no substantial evidence that it failed to satisfy the applicable standard of care or that its act or omission contributed to any injury. We conclude that substantial evidence supports the verdict and therefore will affirm the judgment and postjudgment order.

Appellant and plaintiff Business to Business Markets, Inc. (B2B) appeals a judgment in favor of defendant and respondent Kshema Technologies Ltd. (Kshema) after a jury trial. We reverse and remand the matter for a new trial.

Appellants Albert Agadjanian, and Carloops Inc. (Carloops) appeal from a judgment in favor of respondents Shahram Marc Azordegan and 1 Source Global Tech, Inc. (1 Source). 1 Source purchased a car wash business from Carloops, and Azordegan leased the underlying commercial property from Agadjanian. The jury awarded $950,000 in breach of contract damages for Agadjanian's failure to disclose a material fact related to the sale of the car wash business, and an additional $360,000 for breach of the commercial lease agreement. Appellants appeal from orders denying motions for a new trial, judgment notwithstanding the verdict, and acknowledgement of partial satisfaction of judgment.
We affirm.

Appellant Adrienne Renee Davidson appeals from the judgment of conviction following a jury trial in which she was found guilty of first degree murder of her husband (Pen. Code, § 187, subd. (a)).[1] The jury also found true the allegation that appellant personally and intentionally discharged a firearm causing death. (§ 12022.53, subd. (d).) The trial court sentenced appellant to state prison for a total of 50 years to life, by imposing 25 years to life on the murder conviction and a consecutive 25 years to life on the firearm allegation.
Appellant contends that her conviction must be reversed because the trial court erroneously instructed the jury and excluded relevant evidence and the prosecutor engaged in numerous instances of misconduct. We disagree and affirm the judgment.

Defendant Jose Johnny Prado appeals from the judgment entered upon his jury conviction of first degree murder. Defendant contends the trial court committed reversible error when it failed to instruct the jury that (1) under the natural and probable consequences doctrine, an aider and abettor could be guilty of a lesser degree of murder than the perpetrator, and (2) the absence of heat of passion is an element of malice aforethought. We find no reversible error.
Defendant also contends that he was prejudiced by the trial court's inadequate inquiry into the effectiveness of his appointed counsel under People v. Marsden (1970) 2 Cal.3d 118 (Marsden). On direction from the California Supreme Court, we vacated our previous decision in order to reconsider this contention in light of People v. Sanchez (2011) 53 Cal.4th 80 (Sanchez). After considering the parties' supplemental briefing, we again affirm the judgment.

In this marital dissolution proceeding, Mark Tsuei seeks to appeal from the trial court's order designating an elisor to execute documents necessary to effectuate the sale of the family residence. Respondent Teresa Tsuei has filed a motion to dismiss the appeal on the ground that the order appealed from is not appealable. We will grant the motion to dismiss the appeal.

Defendant A.N. pleaded no contest to second degree burglary and unlawful taking of a vehicle. The juvenile court made him a ward of the court and placed him on probation, conditioned on a six-month commitment to the Orin Allen Youth Rehabilitation Facility, a county institution. The court imposed a number of additional probation conditions, including a condition that defendant is â€

Plaintiff Chi Kin Hui appeals from a summary judgment entered against him on his complaint seeking insurance coverage for the defense of a claim for intentionally destroying vegetable crops by â€

In this appeal defendant Emile Mooser seeks review of a preliminary injunction issued in favor of Michael Dorian and Alexandra Kane-Dorian (collectively, "the Dorians") and the two entities of which the Dorians were principals, Briand Properties LLC and Morgan-Kane Foodservice Group, Inc.[1] (Morgan-Kane). Defendant contends that the superior court's ruling was unsupported by the facts and the law governing the parties' relationship. We find no abuse of discretion and therefore will affirm the order.

On October 1, 2007, Yu Ju Fan's worried coworkers alerted police that she could not be contacted. Upon doing a welfare check of Fan's residence, the police found Fan dead in the master bed, the victim of 34 knife wounds. Defendant Audi Allan Andaya, a friend of Fan's next door neighbor, was arrested for the crime nine months later.
A jury convicted defendant of first-degree murder (count 1; Pen. Code, § 187)[1] and first-degree burglary (count 2; §§ 459-460). Also, the jury found true that he personally used a knife (§ 12022, subd. (b)(1)), but found not true that the murder was committed while defendant was engaged in the burglary. (§ 190.2, subd. (a)(17).). At sentencing, the court imposed a sentence of 30 years to life, consisting of an indeterminate term of 25 to life for the murder, with one consecutive year for personal use of a knife, and the midterm of four consecutive years for the burglary. The court stated that count 1 was â€

On August 27, 2009, a jury convicted defendant Shawn Richard Beck of three counts of first degree burglary, one count of attempted first degree burglary and one count of receiving stolen property. On March 16, 2010, the court suspended criminal proceedings because both the court and defense counsel had a doubt about the mental competency of defendant. The court ordered psychological and psychiatric examinations of defendant. On August 20, 2010, the court found defendant was not a mentally incompetent person under Penal Code section 1368. The court sentenced defendant to seven years four months in state prison.
We appointed counsel to represent defendant on appeal. Counsel filed a brief which set forth the facts of the case. Counsel did not argue against the client, but advised the court no issues were found to argue on defendant's behalf. (People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436.) Defendant was given 30 days to file written argument on defendant's own behalf. On November 23, 2011, defendant's 11-page handwritten brief was filed. We have examined the record and found no arguable issue, but discuss what was raised by counsel and defendant. We affirm.

The parties in this case were candidates for the Republican nomination for the office of Secretary of State in the June 8, 2010, California statewide primary election. Orly Taitz was defeated by Damon Dunn in the statewide primary election, and Dunn was later defeated by incumbent Debra Bowen at the November 2010 statewide general election. After the election, Taitz filed a lawsuit against Dunn alleging election and voter fraud, as well as common law fraud. In her complaint, Taitz sought a criminal investigation, declaratory relief, damages, and punitive damages due to the alleged fraud. The court granted Dunn's motion for judgment on the pleadings (JOP). On appeal, Taitz asserts she adequately pled an election contest and a cause of action for common law fraud. We disagree and affirm the judgment.