|
Evidence Law
An economic consultant with no experience allocating costs for a subscription-based newspaper with paid advertising, lacked the foundational knowledge to conduct a cost analysis for a claim that a defendant sold a certain type of print advertising at prices that violated California’s Unfair Practices Act; an expert’s uninformed reliance on another’s analysis is not the mark of an opinion rooted in sound logic.
San Francisco Print Media Company v. The Hearst Corporation - filed Jan. 31, 2020, First District, Div. Three
Cite as 2020 S.O.S. 461
Full text click here >
Real Property
A trial court erred in concluding that a coastal development permit was required under state law regulations promulgated by the California Coastal Commission where the commission had certified a city’s local coastal program and the local coastal program provisions did not require coastal development permits for improvements to existing structures.
Citizens for South Bay Coastal Access v. City of San Diego - filed Feb. 18, 2020, Fourth District, Div. One
Cite as 2020 S.O.S. 679
Full text click here >
Social Security
Denial of disability benefits was appropriate where the administrative law judge provided specific and legitimate reasons for discounting the opinions of the claimant’s physicians, correctly concluded that the claimant’s impairments did not result in an inability to ambulate effectively, and relied reasonably on a vocational expert's testimony despite the expert's failure to provide information about the sources underlying the testimony.
Ford v. Saul - filed Feb. 20, 2020
Cite as 2020 S.O.S. 18-35794
Full text click here >
Probate Law
Probate Code § 825(a) requires that the proposed conservatee be produced at the hearing on the guardianship petition unless certain exceptions are met; the proposed conservatee may be excused from attending the hearing if she expressly communicated that she is unwilling to attend and does not contest the conservatorship or oppose the proposed conservator. There is no authority allowing a biological parent to waive the §1825 rights of an adult proposed conservatee, regardless of the degree of mental impairment.
Conservatorship of A.E. - filed Feb. 18, 2020, Second District, Div. Six
Cite as 2020 S.O.S. 677
Full text click here >
A contingent future interest is property no matter how improbable the contingency; persons in existence, who are specifically designated in a trust instrument to take in default of the exercise of a power of appointment by the holder of the preceding estate, are beneficiaries of that trust and acquire vested remainder interests, although their interests are subject to complete divestment. If a proceeding will adversely affect a person’s property interest, due process requires that the person be given notice by mail of the proceeding and an opportunity to be heard when the person’s name and address are reasonably ascertainable.
Roth v. Jelley - filed Feb. 24, 2020, First District, Div. Two
Cite as 2020 S.O.S. 792
Full text click here >
A probate court did not err in equitably reforming a pour-over will where there was substantial evidence the testator’s actual and specific intent at the time the trust and will were drafted was to dispose of her separate property only; where there is a mistake in expression of the testator’s actual and specific intent at the time the will was drafted, the will should be reformed to express that actual intent.
Wilkin v. Nelson - filed Feb. 3, 2020, publication ordered Feb. 26, 2020, Second District, Div. Six
Cite as 2020 S.O.S. 907
Full text click here >
Real Property
Whether a trespass or nuisance claim for an encroachment is barred by the statute of limitations turns on whether the encroachment is continuing or permanent; for permanent encroachments, the three-year statute of limitations begins to run on the date the encroachment began, and bars all claims brought after its passage; for continuing encroachments, a plaintiff may assert a claim even if the encroachment began outside the limitations period, but is limited to recovering damages incurred in the preceding three-year period. The crucial test of the permanency of a trespass or nuisance is whether the trespass or nuisance can be discontinued or abated.
Madani v. Rabinowitz - filed Feb. 24, 2020, Second District, Div. four
Cite as 2020 S.O.S. 800
Full text click here >
|