Archive for the ‘Case law’ Category

Pulte Homes Corporation v. Williams Mechanical, Inc. – Dissolution of Corporation Not Possible When Corporation is Suspended by Franchise Tax Board (2016-9-16)

The recent decision in Pulte Homes Corporation v. Williams Mechanical, Inc. (Aug. 9, 2016) 2 Cal.App.5th 267 was arose from a claim by Pulte for “$69,576 based on Williams’s allegedly negligent performance of a subcontract for the installation of plumbing in two residential construction projects.” The advance sheets contained the entire opinion.  When the decision […]






Taylor Anderson LLP v. U.S. Bank – Chargeback of Cashier’s Check Approved by Court (2016-9-5)

The law of payment systems has interested this writer for many years.  It is an area of law filled with arcane and technical rules, most of which are never encountered in day-to-day transactions. Think of it.  Millions of checks are processed each day, yet it is a rare occurrence when a legal issue arises involving […]






Rancho Mirage Country Club v. Hazelbaker – Another Reason Not to Fight Your Homeowners Association (2016-8-16)

There’s an old saying – “You can’t fight city hall.”  In the case of a homeowners association, the saying should be, “You can’t afford to fight a homeowners association.”  Because the deck is stacked against the homeowner. In the recent case of Rancho Mirage Country Club Homeowners Ass’n v. Thomas B. Hazelbaker (Aug. 8, 2016) […]






Janice H. v. 696 North Robertson, LLC – Premises Liability is Never a Clear Question in California (2016-7-21)

The recent decision in Janice H. v. 696 North Robertson, LLC (July 14, 2016) ___ Cal.App.4th ___ addressed the always difficult question of premises liability.  More specifically, When is the operator of real property liable for an injury to a guest in a unisex bathroom?  The court’s answer – a resounding, It depends. The facts […]






Taylor v. NU Digital Marketing, Inc. – Remedy of Unlawful Detainer Notwithstanding Contract for Sale (2016-6-29)

The remedy of unlawful detainer is available in three situations under California law, most commonly when a tenant holds over after termination of the lease, or when the tenant continues to occupy the property after breach of the lease. Less commonly, unlawful detainer is available to an owner “against an employee, agent, or licensee whose […]






Greenspan v. LADT LLC – Once and for All, a Trust Is Not an Entity (2016-5-26)

Sometimes a court provides a clear statement of the law.  Greenspan v. LADT LLC (2010) 191 Cal.App.4th 486 is one such opinion, providing a definite and authoritative answer to the issue of whether a trust is an entity – it is not. From the opinion. “Courts often speak of the alter ego doctrine as if […]






Jones v. Wachovia Bank – Limitation on Property Owner’s Ability to Testify Regarding Value (2016-5-12)

The decision in Jones v. Wachovia Bank (2014) 230 Cal.App.4th 935 reminds us that all opinion testimony must be supported by reasonable foundation.  The underlying complaint was based on an allegation “the bank breached an agreement to postpone the trustee sale and, by reason of that breach, plaintiffs lost their equity in the property.” The […]






Almanor Lakeside Villas Owners Ass’n v. Carson – $100,000 in Attorney’s Fees Awarded to Homeowners Association that Recovered $6,600 in Fines (2016-4-30)

Let me be up front – this author does not particularly care for homeowners’ associations.  In my opinion, they have too much power, which is often wielded with a heavy hand. Now comes the decision in Almanor Lakeside Villas Owners Ass’n v. Carson (April 19, 2016) __ Cal.Rptr.3d __, which only reinforces this view.  Here […]






Salazar v. Matejcek – Treble Damages for Removal of Trees Under California Law (2016-4-25)

Civil Code section 3346 authorizes an award of treble damages for “wrongful injuries to timber, trees, or underwood upon the land of another, or removal thereof.”  The defendant in the recent case of Salazar v. Matejcek (Mar. 10, 2016) 245 Cal.App.4th 63 learned that this statute can support very substantial damages. The dispute concerned “a […]






Ferguson v. Yaspan – Statute of Limitations Not Applicable to Defense Based on Rescission (2016-4-15)

In a lawsuit based on a contract, one party can seek relief based on the theory of rescission.  Rescission can be considered an equitable judicial remedy.  Under California Civil Code section 1689, rescission supports “extinction” of the obligation. Rescission can be pled as a basis for affirmative relief, or it can asserted as defense to […]