CA Unpub Decisions

Christine Brewer, a waitress employed at the Cottonwood Golf Club restaurant, filed an action against her employer, Premier Golf Properties, LP, dba Cottonwood Golf Club (Cottonwood) asserting numerous causes of action. Among her claims were causes of action for violations of various Labor Code[1]sections, including the meal break and rest break requirements ( 226.7), the pay stub requirements ( 226) and the minimum wage requirements ( 203/1197). Brewer's action sought wages, penalties and attorney fees under the provisions of the Labor Code.
In this appeal, Cottonwood challenges the trial court's order denying its motion to set aside portions of the judgment as void under Code of Civil Procedure section 473, subdivision (d) (section 473, subdivision (d)). Cottonwood's motion principally argued the judgment granting various forms of relief under the Labor Code was void because (1) Brewer had not exhausted her administrative remedies, and (2) the statute of limitations barred the award of some of the penalties. The trial court denied the motion, and this appeal followed. The order is affirmed.

Michael John Russell entered a negotiated guilty plea to assault with a semiautomatic firearm (Pen. Code, 245,[1]subd. (b)) and corporal injury to a cohabitant ( 273.5, subd. (a)). Russell also admitted he personally used a firearm in the commission of the assault count. ( 12022.5, subd. (a).) The plea bargain called for dismissal of the remaining 10 counts, including eight felonies, and a sentencing lid of 11 years.
After denying probation, the trial court sentenced Russell to a 10 year prison term.
The trial court denied Russell's request for a certificate of probable cause.

This is the third appeal arising out of the action filed by Christine Brewer, a waitress employed at the restaurant for Cottonwood Golf Club, against her employer, Premier Golf Properties, LP, dba Cottonwood Golf Club (Cottonwood). In the underlying action, the jury returned special verdicts in favor of Brewer, awarding her approximately $25,000 for various violations of Labor Code provisions. The original judgment also included $195,000 in punitive damages and the court found Brewer was the prevailing party entitled to attorney fees and costs. In a series of rulings on a variety of posttrial motions, the trial court ordered (1) Brewer was entitled to a certain amount of attorney fees and costs, and (2) Brewer could accept a reduced punitive damages award of $75,000 or Cottonwood would be entitled to a new trial on the ground of excessive damages.
To ensure clarity, it is ordered that any and all iterations of the judgment in the underlying action, including but not limited to the judgment below resulting from the corrections entered on December 19, 2007, are (1) reversed insofar as the judgment includes an award of punitive damages, with directions that on remand the trial court shall enter a new judgment striking any award of punitive damages; (2) reversed insofar as the judgment includes an award of attorney fees, and on remand the trial court shall reconsider and enter a new award of attorney fees considering the opinion in Brewer I; and (3) in all other respects the judgment is affirmed.

Travis Elliott Thompson entered a negotiated guilty plea to one count of assault by means of force likely to produce great bodily injury. (Pen. Code 245, subd. (a)(1).) As part of the plea, Thompson admitted that he had a prison prior ( 667.5, subd. (b)) and that the assault was a serious felony within the meaning of section 1192.7, subdivision (c)(8).
Travis Elliott Thompson entered a negotiated guilty plea to one count of assault by means of force likely to produce great bodily injury. (Pen. Code 245, subd. (a)(1).) As part of the plea, Thompson admitted that he had a prison prior ( 667.5, subd. (b)) and that the assault was a serious felony within the meaning of section 1192.7, subdivision (c)(8). The judgment is affirmed.

Amber R. appeals the findings and orders entered at the termination of parental rights hearing held pursuant to Welfare and Institutions Code section 366.26. Citing In re Sade C. (1996) 13 Cal.4th 952, she asks this court to exercise its discretion to review the record for error.
Amber R.'s counsel also requests leave for her to file a supplemental brief in propria persona. The request is denied. The appeal is dismissed.

PROCEEDINGS for extraordinary relief after reference to a Welfare and Institutions Code section 366.26 hearing. Harry M. Elias, Judge. Petition denied. Jose O. seeks writ review of orders denying him reunification services and setting a section 366.26 hearing regarding his son, Angel O. Court deny the petition.

A.G. appeals the findings and orders entered at a review hearing at which the juvenile court made custody and visitation orders and terminated dependency jurisdiction Citing In re Sade C. (1996) 13 Cal.4th 952, she asks this court to exercise its discretion to review the record for error. A.G.'s counsel also requests leave for her to file a supplemental brief in propria persona. The request is denied. The appeal is dismissed.

Lee Davis appeals from a judgment of two years in state prison. He contends that the sentencing judge erred by not requesting an updated probation report. For the following reasons, Court affirm.

On January 8, 2007, appellant, Hector Pruneda, waived his right to a preliminary hearing. On January 18, 2007, the People filed an information alleging that appellant committed continuous sexual abuse on a child under age 14 (Pen. Code, 288.5, count one)[1]and lewd and lascivious conduct on a child under age 14 ( 288, subd. (a), count two). The judgment is affirmed.

On April 22, 1998, appellant, Jose Limon Barreto, pled guilty to possession for sale of methamphetamine (Health & Saf. Code, 11378, subd. (a)) and admitted a firearm enhancement (Pen. Code, 12022, subd. (c)). On December 6, 2007, Barreto filed a Motion to Vacate Conviction and Judgment. On December 20, 2007, the court denied the motion. On appeal, Barreto contends the court abused its discretion when it denied his Motion to Vacate Conviction and Judgment. Court affirm.

Appellant, A.C., appeals from the juvenile courts order denying her petition pursuant to Welfare and Institutions Code section 388 to modify the courts prior orders terminating her reunification services. The court terminated appellants parental rights to N.L. pursuant to section 366.26. Appellant also contends the court erred in failing to apply the parent child relationship exception rather than accepting adoption as the final plan for N.L.

It was alleged in a juvenile wardship petition (Welf. & Inst. Code, 602) filed February 15, 2008, that appellant J.F., a minor, committed second degree robbery (Pen. Code, 211, 212.5, subd. (c)), and that he personally used a firearm in the commission of that offense (Pen. Code, 12022.53, subd. (b)). In a supplemental wardship petition (Welf. & Inst. Code, 777) filed February 22, 2008, it was alleged, inter alia, that by committing the robbery, appellant violated his probation granted in a previous wardship proceeding. Appellants appointed appellate counsel has filed an opening brief which summarizes the pertinent facts, with citations to the record, raises no issues, and asks that this court independently review the record. (Peoplev.Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d. 436.) Appellant has not responded to this courts invitation to submit additional briefing.

Defendant was not denied his right to confrontation by the admission of gang expert testimony which included the experts reliance on police records such as field interviews in forming his opinion. The court did not err in admitting a recording of defendants conversation with another man in the back of a patrol car, or in admitting photographs of the victims wounds. Court affirm.

Paula Skerston appeals from an injunction against harassment issued at the behest of Linda Sheehan. Skerston argues her conduct was constitutionally protected and served a legitimate purpose, and there was insufficient evidence of emotional distress to establish harassment. Court disagree and affirm.