The Second District affirmed the denial of a charter school petition, holding that unchallenged findings under two statutory grounds independently supported the denial regardless of whether a third ground was properly applied.
The Second District affirms summary judgment for a grocery store in a slip-and-fall case, holding the plaintiff’s claim that wet shorts proved floor wetness was speculation insufficient to create a triable issue of fact.
Court of Appeal affirms jury finding that subcontractor termination was without cause but orders new trial on damages, holding trial court erred in failing to instruct jury on the subcontract’s exclusive cost-plus-profit formula.
The Third District affirmed the denial of a motion to compel arbitration in an employment wage-and-hour class action, finding the arbitration agreements unconscionable due to overbroad scope and lack of mutuality, following Cook v. USC.
The Colorado Court of Appeals affirmed a $1.9 million penalty and certificate suspension against an oil and gas operator, holding that an ECMC compliance plan is agency action rather than an enforceable contract, and that the penalties were neither arbitrary nor excessive under the Eighth Amendment.
The Colorado Court of Appeals held that public policy bars contractual indemnification for damages resulting from intentional CUFTA and COCCA violations, even when the damages awarded are characterized as compensatory rather than punitive.
The Colorado Court of Appeals held that a separation agreement releasing an employee from wage claims was void under the CWCA anti-waiver provision, section 8-4-121, because it purported to waive the employee’s right to recover over $440,000 in earned but unpaid salary.
The California Court of Appeal held that a final judgment in a water district’s validation action bars a ratepayer’s later class action and mandamus petition challenging the same water rates under Proposition 218, even where the ratepayer received only notice by publication.
California Court of Appeal affirms $24.7 million jury verdict against a foster family agency, holding that an FFA’s duty of care requires liability where it knew or should have known of a foster parent’s risk of sexual abuse, applying the Rowland v. Christian factors to adopt a constructive knowledge standard.
The First District holds that FCRA plaintiffs in California need not show concrete injury to have standing, reversing class decertification and departing from the Fifth District’s Limon decision.