California Case Summaries

1st District Court of Appeal

1st District Court of Appeal, Administrative Law, Constitutional Law, Real Estate Law

City of Clearlake v. Highlands Mutual Water Co. — Statute Requiring Cancellation of Public Entity’s Water Company Shares Is Constitutional

The First District holds that Corporations Code section 14300's mandatory cancellation of a public entity's appurtenant water company shares does not violate the California Constitution's limited exception permitting public entities to hold such shares.

1st District Court of Appeal, Criminal Law, Litigation

People v. Tyler — Court Warns That ‘Could Be Convicted’ Is the Wrong Standard at a Penal Code Section 1172.6 Resentencing Hearing

The First District publishes this opinion specifically to flag a recurring error: at a section 1172.6 evidentiary hearing, the trial court is an independent fact-finder who must decide whether the petitioner IS guilty beyond a reasonable doubt under current law — not whether a jury 'could' convict them.

1st District Court of Appeal, Criminal Law, Litigation

People v. Powell — Trial Court Can Correct Presentence Credit Math Errors Without Triggering Full Resentencing

The First District holds that a trial court's mathematical error in calculating presentence custody credits is a clerical error the court can correct at any time — but that correction does not render the judgment nonfinal or entitle the defendant to full resentencing under ameliorative legislation, rejecting a contrary line of cases.

1st District Court of Appeal, Civil Procedure, Labor & Employment Law, Litigation

Smith v. Superior Court — Court of Appeal Allows 440 Tesla Racial Discrimination Plaintiffs to Proceed in Joint Complaints

The First District grants a writ of mandate requiring Tesla to face five joint complaints from 440 Black factory workers, holding that permissive joinder under CCP § 378 is proper where all plaintiffs allege injury from the same factory-wide pattern of racial discrimination — and that manageability concerns cannot justify ordering mass individual re-filings.

1st District Court of Appeal, Constitutional Law, Criminal Law

People v. DePape — California Double Jeopardy Bars Three State Charges After Federal Conviction in Paul Pelosi Attack

The First District affirms dismissal of three state charges against David DePape — including attempted murder — under California's statutory double jeopardy protection, holding that mental-state elements cannot save a state charge when the required physical act was already proved in a prior federal conviction.

1st District Court of Appeal, Labor & Employment Law, Litigation

Betanco v. Living Spaces Furniture — Retail Furniture Delivery Driver Is a Transportation Worker Exempt from the Federal Arbitration Act

A furniture delivery driver who never crosses state lines but delivers goods that arrived in California from out of state is a "transportation worker" exempt from the Federal Arbitration Act, the First District Court of Appeal holds, affirming the driver's right to pursue his Labor Code and PAGA claims in court.

1st District Court of Appeal, Civil Procedure, Insurance Law, Litigation

Guthrie v. Transamerica Life Insurance Co. — Class Certification Denied for UCL Claims Over Bundled Life Insurance Premium

California's First Appellate District affirmed denial of class certification in a UCL action alleging Transamerica's bundled Trendsetter LB life insurance policy misled buyers about the cost of included accelerated death benefits, holding that individual differences in agent communications and policy data pages prevented class-wide proof of deception.

1st District Court of Appeal, Administrative Law, Labor & Employment Law

City and County of San Francisco v. PERB — San Francisco Charter Excludes City Attorneys’ At-Will Status from Binding Interest Arbitration

San Francisco's First Appellate District reversed a PERB order requiring the City to submit its attorneys' at-will status to binding interest arbitration, holding that the San Francisco Charter's civil service provisions place that question outside the scope of the MMBA's interest arbitration process.

1st District Court of Appeal, Constitutional Law, Criminal Law

People v. Hayes — SWAT Coercion to Exit Home Is an In-Home Arrest, but a Valid Warrant Saves the Search

When a SWAT team uses gas, drones, and robots to flush a suspect from his apartment, the resulting arrest is treated as an in-home arrest — but California's First District upheld the conviction anyway because the underlying warrant affidavit, even with false statements excised, still established probable cause.

1st District Court of Appeal, Civil Procedure, Litigation, Real Estate Law

County of Del Norte v. Britt — Homeowners Wrongly Named in Housing Receivership Can Recover Attorney Fees from the County

When a county names the relatives of a deceased property owner in a housing receivership proceeding and then fails to establish their liability, those relatives are entitled to recover attorney fees from the county under Health and Safety Code section 17980.7(c)(11), which overrides the older, more general bar on cost awards against municipalities.

1st District Court of Appeal, Civil Procedure, Litigation

Quinteros v. Harbor Distributing — Court Upholds $6,000 Sanctions for AI-Generated Brief With Eight Fabricated Case Quotations

A California appeals court upheld $6,000 in sanctions against a law firm whose outsourced contract attorney filed a brief containing two nonexistent case citations and eight fabricated quotations — likely generated by AI — confirming that attorneys of record bear ultimate responsibility for the accuracy of every filing regardless of who drafted it.

1st District Court of Appeal, Labor & Employment Law, Litigation

Doss v. Tesla — Factory Yard Hostlers Who Move Interstate Trailers Are Exempt from the Federal Arbitration Act

Tesla's yard hostlers — who move 53-foot interstate trailers within factory grounds to facilitate unloading — are 'transportation workers engaged in interstate commerce' exempt from the Federal Arbitration Act, the First District held, because their work is a necessary step in completing an interstate delivery.

1st District Court of Appeal, Civil Procedure, Environmental Law, Litigation

Baker v. Bay Area Toll Authority — CEQA Challenge to Bay Bridge’s Bay Lights 360 LED Installation Is Time-Barred and Precluded

The First District affirms that a CEQA challenge to the Bay Bridge's Bay Lights 360 LED installation is time-barred, holding that a subsequent Caltrans encroachment permit does not create a new project or restart the limitations period, and issue preclusion bars relitigating questions resolved in an earlier dismissed suit.

1st District Court of Appeal, Civil Procedure, Labor & Employment Law, Litigation

Askins v. CRST Expedited — California Courts Do Not Require Concrete Injury for Standing Under the Federal Fair Credit Reporting Act

The First District Court of Appeal held that California plaintiffs may pursue statutory damages under the Fair Credit Reporting Act without proving concrete injury, departing from the Fifth District's Limon decision and reversing a class decertification order.

1st District Court of Appeal, Family Law, Personal Injury & Tort

C.F. v. Alternative Family Services — Foster Family Agency Owes Duty to Protect Children from Abuse It Knew or Should Have Known About

The First District affirmed a $24.7 million verdict against a foster family agency, holding that FFAs have a duty to protect foster children from abuse they knew or should have known about, but rejecting both an unlimited protective duty and one requiring actual knowledge.

1st District Court of Appeal, Administrative Law, Constitutional Law, Real Estate Law

Hiller v. Marin Municipal Water District — Ratepayer’s Proposition 218 Challenge Barred by Validation Statutes After Failure to Respond to District’s Validation Action

First District holds that a ratepayer’s Proposition 218 challenge to water rates is permanently barred after she failed to participate in the water district’s validation action within the 120-day window set by Government Code section 53759.

1st District Court of Appeal, Environmental Law, Litigation

Chemical Toxin Working Group v. Best Naturals — Court of Appeal Rules Substantial Compliance Applies to Proposition 65 Pre-Suit Notices

California's First District Court of Appeal holds that the doctrine of substantial compliance applies to Proposition 65 pre-suit notice requirements, reversing a trial court that dismissed a toxic-substances lawsuit for failing to identify a responsible individual by name in the notice.

Scroll to Top