CA Unpub Decisions

Appellant, James E. Davis, lived in a building located in San Francisco owned by respondent California Culinary Academy, Inc. (CCA) that was primarily as a residential facility for CCA students. Others, such as appellant, who were not students but resided in the building at the time it was acquired by CCA, were permitted to retain their tenancies. After receiving information that appellant had raped one of its female students who also lived in the building, CCA personally served appellant with a three-day notice to quit the premises, with which he complied. A police investigation of the alleged rape was conducted, but criminal charges were never filed against appellant. Court affirm the judgment.

United Services Automobile Association (USAA) appeals from an order denying its motions to compel arbitration of employment-related claims asserted by its former employees, Thomas J. Murray and Vincent B. McLorg. USAA contends the trial court erred in concluding that the arbitration agreement at issue is unconscionably one-sided and thus unenforceable under Armendariz v. Foundation Health Psychcare Services, Inc. (2000) 24 Cal.4th 83 (Armendariz).
Court conclude the agreement impermissibly restricts the right to recover certain costs that might otherwise be awarded in a court action. Aside from these cost recovery provisions, there are no substantively unconscionable provisions in the agreement. In light of our conclusion, we reverse the order denying the motions to compel arbitration and remand the matter to the trial court to exercise its discretion whether to sever the unconscionable provisions and compel arbitration.

Plaintiff Eric Van Scoy appeals from a judgment in favor of defendant Valero Oil Company (Valero) in his action seeking to recover damages for personal injuries allegedly suffered when inhaling fumes from a fire on Valeros property. He contends that the trial court erroneously (1) sustained a demurrer eliminating causes of action for battery and nuisance, (2) granted a summary adjudication motion removing his claim for punitive damages, and (3) denied his motion for a new trial on the grounds that the evidence was insufficient to support the jurys finding that Valero was not negligent, and that he should be entitled to allege additional causes of action for nuisance and strict liability. We conclude that plaintiffs second amended complaint failed to state a cause of action for battery or nuisance and that substantial evidence supports the finding that defendant was not negligent. Moreover, the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying plaintiffs motion for a new trial to allege additional causes of action. Because Court affirm the judgment imposing no liability, it is unnecessary to consider the courts ruling striking the punitive damage allegations.

Counsel appointed for defendant Anthony Buentipo has asked this court to independently examine the record in accordance with People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436, to determine if there are any arguable issues that require briefing. Defendant was apprised of his right to file a supplemental brief, but he did not do so. Court have conducted our review, conclude there are no arguable issues, and affirm.

This is an appeal from an order denying a motion to disqualify three law firms from representing respondents Allen Bates, James C. Brewer and Jacquelyn Vilchinsky (collectively, respondents) in this elder abuse class action lawsuit. Appellants Granada Healthcare and Rehabilitation Center, LLC, Eureka Healthcare and Rehabilitation Center, LLC, Pacific Healthcare and Rehabilitation Center, LLC, St. Luke Healthcare and Rehabilitation Center, LLC, and Seaview Healthcare and Rehabilitation Center, LLC, (collectively, appellants) contend the trial court erred in issuing such order because one of those law firms previously represented Dr. Patrick Dawson, M.D., appellants medical director and member of their governing body, in a separate medical malpractice action. This appeal followed.
The trial courts order denying appellants motion to disqualify is affirmed.

Zealously advocating on behalf of a client is appropriate. Repeatedly engaging in intemperate and unprofessional conduct in order to prejudice the jury in favor of ones client is not. In this case, defense counsels misconduct at trial so prejudiced the plaintiff that the law requires us to reverse the judgment and order a new trial.

Plaintiff and cross-defendant United Television Broadcasting Systems, Inc. (UTB) appeals from a nonsuit judgment on its complaint and from a postjudgment order awarding attorneys fees to defendants Defendant and cross-complainant Terence E. Crosby (Crosby) appeals from a nonsuit judgment, on his cross-complaint, in favor of UTB. Court affirm the judgments in part and reverse in part, and we vacate the order.

Stephen James appeals from the judgment after a court trial in this dissolution proceeding. He contends that the trial court abused its discretion when it awarded $75,000 in attorneys' fees to Elizabeth James pursuant to Family Code section 271.[1] He also contends that a separate property reimbursement award of $24,228 to Elizabeth for contributions to community real property pursuant to section 2640 was not supported by sufficient evidence. Elizabeth appeals contending that the court should have ordered an unequal division of Stephen's pension to ensure that the amounts awarded to her would be paid. Court conclude that the $24,228 separate property reimbursement award must be reduced by $8,228 and otherwise affirm.

Defendants Antonio Rios and Ignacio Cuevas timely appealed their convictions on two counts of first degree murder (counts I and II) and two counts of attempted, premeditated murder (counts III and IV). Defendants were tried together by separate juries.[1] The juries found various murder special circumstance, gang and firearm allegations to be true. Defendants were each sentenced to state prison for life without the possibility of parole as to each of counts I and II, plus life with the possibility of parole on each of counts III and IV, all to run consecutively. Additional consecutive terms of 25 years to life were imposed on each count pursuant to Penal Code section[2]12022.53, subdivision (d) for one of the firearm enhancements. The other firearm and gang enhancements were stayed. The main issue raised on appeal is the contention that the trial court improperly admitted into evidence a recording of a jailhouse conversation between defendants. The judgments are affirmed as modified.

Appellant Linda Diane Padilla appeals from a judgment denying her spousal property petition filed in proceedings regarding the estate of Pete Golsh Padilla. Court affirm.

Defendant Alexis Garcia was retried for the murder of Ricardo Castro (Pen. Code, 187, subd. (a)) after the jury in his first trial deadlocked by a vote of six to six. During his second trial, the jury found defendant guilty of murder during the commission of which he personally and intentionally discharged a firearm, causing great bodily injury and/or death (id., 12022.53, subd. (d)). The jury further found that he committed the murder for the benefit of a criminal street gang (id., 186.22, subd. (b)(1)). The trial court sentenced defendant to state prison for a total term of 50 years to life.
On appeal, defendant contends (1) he was denied access to important exculpatory evidence when the trial court denied his Pitchess motion and his Brady request; (2) the defense was improperly restricted when the trial court prevented his trial counsel from arguing that he was not the shooter; and (3) the evidence was insufficient to establish his guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Court reverse with directions.

This action arises out an automobile shredder business (the Shredder) that was sold and moved from the City of Carson to the City of Colton. Vasquez claimed the Shredder endangered public health and distributed a flyer allegedly defaming the Carson owners/operators of the Shredder, collectively referred to as National Metal.
Vasquez sued for malicious prosecution after National Metal's complaint for defamation and trade libel was dismissed under the anti-SLAPP statute. ( 425.16.) The trial court granted summary judgment for National Metal, finding that National Metal had probable cause to file the underlying action for defamation. We affirm. (Jarrow Formulas, Inc. v. LaMarche (2003) 31 Cal.4th 728, 741-743.) The judgment (order granting summary judgment) is affirmed.

Plaintiff Janice S. Cleveland appeals from a judgment in favor of defendants Allstate Insurance Company (Allstate), Law Offices of Eric W. Bladh, Eric W. Bladh, William C. Cole and Associates, and William C. Cole. Plaintiff asserts her case was one for employment discrimination, harassment and retaliation involving age, gender and religious bias leading up to her being improperly selected for a reduction in workforce. Plaintiff contends the court made a number of erroneous rulings in granting summary judgment in favor of defendants. Court affirm.

Angelica R. and Jose E. appeal from the dispositional order declaring Graciela A.,J.E. and Jose E. dependent children of the juvenile court under Welfare and Institutions Code section 300. Court affirm.