eBriefs Header
  Friday, May 3, 2019  
The following caselaw summaries are provided as a courtesy to Los Angeles County Bar Association members by the Metropolitan News-Enterprise www.metnews.com. Summaries from the past 90 days are archived and searchable on the LACBA Web site at www.lacba.org/news-and-publications/daily-ebriefs.
Civil Procedure
Mandamus relief is not proper where a district court applied incorrect legal tests and did not provide sufficient jurisdictional analysis but did not commit clear error in finding jurisdiction over a third-party.

In re Boon Global Limited - filed May 3, 2019
Cite as 2019 S.O.S. 18-71347
Full text click here
Criminal Law and Procedure
California's timeliness rule for habeas petitions, although discretionary, met the firmly established criteria for a "firmly established and regularly followed" rule as of Jan. 6, 2000. A habeas petitioner established cause to excuse his default due to the confluence of several factors, including actions by his counsel that constituted abandonment, but the California Supreme Court's conclusory denial of his claims on their merits did not preclude a district court from conducting a prejudice inquiry.

Bradford v. Davis - filed May 3, 2019
Cite as 2019 S.O.S. 15-99018
Full text click here
Immigration Law
Under 8 C.F.R. Sec. 1240.11(a)(2), an immigration judge is required to inform a petitioner subject to removal proceedings of "apparent eligibility to apply for any of the benefits enumerated in this chapter," and the "apparent eligibility" standard is triggered whenever the facts before the IJ raise a reasonable possibility that the petitioner may be eligible for relief. "Special Immigrant Juvenile" status is a form of relief covered by the "apparent eligibility" standard of 8 C.F.R. SEC. 1240.11(a)(2).

C.J.L.G., A Juvenile Male v. Barr - filed May 3, 2019
Cite as 2019 S.O.S. 16-73801
Full text click here
Hernandez v. Chappell - filed May 3, 2019
Cite as 2019 S.O.S. 11-99013
Full text click here
Criminal Law and Procedure
Senate Bill No. 620 applies to defendants whose judgments were not final when the law took effect, it permits those who did not agree to serve a specific term for a firearm enhancement to seek re-sentencing, and it permits those who did agree to a specific sentence to seek to withdraw from their pleas, but it does not authorize trial courts to reduce agreed-upon sentences while otherwise permitting defendants to retain the benefits of their plea agreements and avoid the likely risk of having to continue defending against the charges.

People v. Fox - filed May 3, 2019, First District, Div. One
Cite as 2019 S.O.S. 2123
Full text click here
Criminal Law and Procedure
Federal law does not preempt the application of the Immigration Consultant Act to a non-lawyer who was not engaged in "representation," as defined by federal law.

People v. Salcido - filed May 2, 2019, Fourth District, Div. Two
Cite as 2019 S.O.S. 2135
Full text click here
Taniguchi v. Restoration Homes - filed May 2, 2019, First District, Div. Two
Cite as 2019 S.O.S. 2143
Full text click here
Abogado.com is the premier online destination for Spanish-speaking consumers looking for legal help. The site offers comprehensive legal resources, informative videos, and an extensive Spanish-language attorney directory that enables consumers to get help with their legal needs. With unparalleled visibility in search engines, as well as a rapidly-growing audience, advertising in the Abogado directory allows qualified firms and attorneys to reach and connect with Hispanic legal consumers in ways no other directory can match. Click the link below to learn more about Abogado!

read more
LACBA members receive discounts on Metropolitan News Company publications and services. For more information, contact Vahn Babigian at (213) 346-0033 or go to http://www.metnews.com/info.html

LACBA Celebrates Over 140 Years of Service to the Los Angeles Legal Community and Recognizes Past and Present Bar Leaders in Honor of Asian American and Pacific Islander Heritage Month

“Hon.   Hon. Dolly M. Gee 
U.S. District Judge Dolly M. Gee is a former partner at Schwartz, Steinsapir, Dohrmann, & Sommers LLP. After graduating from UCLA School of Law, she clerked for Hon. Milton L. Schwartz, U.S. District Judge in the Eastern District of California. She joined her law firm in 1986 and became a partner in 1990. While at the firm, she specialized in the fields of labor law, workplace harassment and employment discrimination. She was a former member of the LACBA Board of Trustees and is a co-founder of the Asian Pacific American Bar Association of Los Angeles County and the Multicultural Bar Alliance. In 2009, President Barack Obama nominated her to the United States District Court for the Central District of California, and the Senate confirmed her by unanimous consent on December 24, 2009. Then Senator Barbara Boxer praised her confirmation, saying, “as a daughter of immigrants from rural China, she personifies the American dream. She used her position as a prominent attorney in Los Angeles to promote racial tolerance and fight for justice for those who face discrimination.” Upon her confirmation, Judge Gee became the first Chinese American woman to serve as a federal judge.

The full text of case rulings are in PDF files and require Adobe’s free Acrobat Reader to view. To download a copy go to: www.adobe.com//products/acrobat/readstep.html
Problems or comments?
Email us at ebriefs@lacba.org
© 2019 Los Angeles County Bar Association. The information contained in this document is intended solely for use by the person identified above. Any transmission to or copying for the benefit of another person is prohibited. Metropolitan News-Enterprise, SOS and MNC are registered trademarks of the Metropolitan News Company. Summaries are copyrighted by Metropolitan News Company © 2019, all rights reserved.