California Cause of Action Tort 
At the Lectern
JULY 6, 2023
Responding to questions asked by the Ninth Circuit about California law, the court’s unanimous opinion by Justice Carol Corrigan precludes an action alleging a construction worker’s wife contracted COVID from her husband due to his employer’s failure to abide by government health orders at the beginning of the pandemic.
At the Lectern
AUGUST 22, 2024
the Supreme Court resolved a question certified by the Ninth Circuit involving the application of California’s economic loss rule. The economic loss rule generally prohibits plaintiffs from recovering tort damages in cases involving breaches of contract that cause only economic losses. Uber Technologies, Inc.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
JonathanTurley
SEPTEMBER 22, 2021
Students at California Lutheran University have filed a federal defamation lawsuit against the school for defamation and false light after the school denounced softball players and coaches as racists for a college skit. ” There are 13 claims: FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION FOR BREACH OF CONTRACT. SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION FOR SLANDER.
ClimateChange-ClimateLaw
MAY 23, 2018
a consolidated case in which Oakland and San Francisco claim that five fossil fuel companies’ production and promotion of fossil fuels constitutes a public nuisance under federal and California common law. BP P.L.C. , Three weeks later, on June 13, Judge John F. But none of the judges in these cases are bound by those decisions.
SCOTUSBlog
JANUARY 16, 2022
In 1951, it was acquired by a California gallery owner, who sold it to a Los Angeles collector. In 2005, after his petition was denied, Claude sued in federal district court in California, where he had lived since 1980. That question turned on whether California law or Spanish law governed. The full painting.
SCOTUSBlog
APRIL 15, 2023
Becerra that “crisis pregnancy centers” opposed to abortion were likely to prevail in their First Amendment challenge to a California law that required them to disclose information about the availability of abortion to their patients. Brown , which upheld a nearly identical California ban on conversion therapy.
At the Lectern
APRIL 14, 2021
2) Was it proper for the Court of Appeal to award costs on appeal under rule 8.278 of the California Rules of Court against an unsuccessful FEHA claimant in the absence of a finding that the underlying claims were objectively frivolous? Cable News Network, Inc. 2019) 7 Cal.5th Tri-Modal Distribution Services. Sandoval v.
Expert insights. Personalized for you.
45 
Let's personalize your content