The Court held that a broker must disclose that the seller’s neighbor told him he planned to remodel and his remodeled house would overlook the seller’s pool and interfere with the view.  This case case also found expert broker testimony is not always necessary to find breach of a broker’s duty care.  The Court stated

January 1, 2017, Civil Code § 1938 was expanded to require:

A Certified Access Specialist (CASp) report can reduce the  minimum statutory damages and allow for a stay of the lawsuit pending a mediation session with the court.  Effective January 1, 2017, revised Code Section 1938 also requires:

  • A commercial property lessor shall state on

The moral fiber of our society continues to degrade.  The following is an attorney ethics issue and as a reminder attorney’s are held to a higher standard.

After a trial on a sexual harassment claim  resulting in an $8,080 jury verdict, and a $7,000 costs award, Plaintiff’s counsel was upset he was not awarded the

A homeowner’s liability insurer does not have duty to defend a lawsuit after the insured intentionally pruned trees on another’s property without permission. The intentional act of hiring a contractor to prune is not an “accident” within the meaning of the policy’s coverage provision, even if the insured mistakenly believed the trees were on the

In California while recreational cannabis is all the rage after January 1, 2018, the California. Medical marijuana laws under California’s “Compassionate Use” Act still provide some benefits.  Including:

  1. Patients with valid medical marijuana ID cards are exempt from paying state sales and use tax applicable to recreational marijuana sales.
  2. Medical marijuana patients can, with a

Intimate Sexual Contact Alone Does Not Constitute Minimum Contacts. A California woman conceived a child in Connecticut but filed a paternity and child support suit in California against the father living in Connecticut.  The trial court denied his  man moved to quash service of summons based on lack of personal jurisdiction. The Court of Appeal reversed, holding  the man’s knowledge that the mother resided in California and the foreseeability that unprotected sex may lead to birth of a child were insufficient to establish the requisite minimum contacts. The appellate court explained that jurisdiction must be based upon facts showing a “substantial connection” to California following Walden v. Fiore (2014) 571 U.S. 277, 289.  (David L. v. Superior Court (Cal. App. 4th Dist., Div. 1, Nov. 26, 2018) 2018 Cal. App. LEXIS 1067.)  The father seems to regularly travel to California on business trips, and he and the woman had sex on those trips including a prior pregnancy.  However,  the Court dismissed these as insufficient contacts for the paternity issue.  For more salacious details, which may have influenced the Court, look here … 
Continue Reading

In law school you are taught “if you are a defendant remove the case to the Federal Court”.  University of Connecticut law professors Alexandra Lahav and Peter Siegelman studied 30 years of data from the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts supporting that directive. According to the law profs, the winning rate for plaintiffs in

In Troester v. Starbucks Corp. (2018) 5 Cal.5th 829 the California Supreme Court answered a legal question sent to it from the Federal Court asking if the relevant wage order and statutes.  The Court held that California does not adopt the federal FLSA permitting application of the (federal) de minimis rule when the employer required the employee to work “off the clock” several minutes per shift.  The Court held that the state wage and hour rules do not permit the de minimis “Defense”.  Read more …
Continue Reading