In Vann v. City and County of San Francisco, published December 12, 2023, the First District Court of Appeal, Division 2 affirmed dismissal of a personal injury lawsuit after demurrer was sustained without leave to amend. The complaint alleges that a bus driver with the San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency drove through an active emergency scene…
In Jones v. Regents of the University of California, ordered published November 28, 2023, the Fourth District Court of Appeal, Division 3 affirmed summary judgment for the defendant regents. An employee of the regents who worked on the UC Irvine campus was riding home from her work on a bicycle. Ten seconds into her ride, while…
In Brown v. City of Inglewood, ordered published June 30, 2023, the Second District Court of Appeal, Division 1 reversed in part a trial court decision denying an anti-SLAPP special motion to strike. The plaintiff was the elected treasurer of the defendant city. She alleged that after she reported concerns about financial improprieties, the city and…
In Marin v. Department of Transportation, ordered published February 23, 2023, the First District Court of Appeal, Division 5 affirmed summary judgment for the defendant department. The department subcontracted to a company construction work on the department's highway. The contract expressly delegated matters of safety at the project to the subcontractor. The contract also provided that…
Update: The California Supreme Court granted review of this case sua sponte. On August 27, 2020, the Supreme Court affirmed the appellate court's decision. Two justices dissented. ************************************************************ In Gund v. County of Trinity, published June 4, 2018, the Third District Court of Appeal affirmed summary judgment granted to the defendant county and a sheriff's deputy…
In Ly v. County of Fresno, published October 12, 2017, the Fifth District Court of Appeal affirmed summary judgment granted the defendant county in a Fair Employment and Housing Act discrimination case brought by three correctional officers. The officers pursued the FEHA action and workers' compensation proceedings simultaneously, with both arising out of alleged employment discrimination…