CA Pub. Decisions

When an unrelated person renders substantial, ongoing health services to a dependent adult, that person may be a care custodian for purposes of statutory scheme that presumptively disqualifies care custodians as beneficiaries of testamentary transfers from dependent adults to whom they provide such services, notwithstanding that the service relationship between the individuals arose out of a preexisting personal friendship rather than a professional or occupational connection.

Where some but not all defendants in federal action were dismissed, and plaintiff did not obtain certificate of appealability regarding dismissed defendants, the action remained pending against dismissed defendants for purposes of rule providing that statute of limitation to file action in state court is stayed during pendency of federal court action, at least through the time for filing an appeal from the court's final order disposing of the entire action.

Provision of Code of Civil Procedure Section 473(b) requiring court to set aside "default" or "default judgment" where it is result of attorney mistake, inadvertence, surprise or neglect applies only where defendant has failed to answer a complaint, or where court has entered judgment against defendant after entering defendant's default following his failure to answer. Where court entered amended judgment against defendants following uncontested trial from which defendants were absent due to counsel's failure to inform them of trial date, Sec. 473(b) did not apply.

Collateral estoppel bars state from prosecuting for welfare fraud a person who was exonerated of that charge in administrative proceedings.

Collateral estoppel bars state from prosecuting for welfare fraud a person who was exonerated of that charge in administrative proceedings.

Collateral estoppel bars state from prosecuting for welfare fraud a person who was exonerated of that charge in administrative proceedings.

Veterinarian's rule under which dog owners who contract with veterinarians to treat their dogs are exempt from liability, should their dog bite a veterinarian during treatment, also bars kennel worker's strict liability claim against a dog owner under Civil Code Sec. 3342 for injuries sustained from a dog bite or attack while worker was caring for owner's dog boarded at kennel. Kennel worker's allegations that dog owner failed to disclose that dog was predisposed to bite and attack people could be relevant on retrial to common law strict liability and negligence causes of action. This action may be maintained if owner of a domestic animal that bites or injures another person knew or had reason to know of animal's vicious propensities.

Veterinarian's rule under which dog owners who contract with veterinarians to treat their dogs are exempt from liability, should their dog bite a veterinarian during treatment, also bars kennel worker's strict liability claim against a dog owner under Civil Code Sec. 3342 for injuries sustained from a dog bite or attack while worker was caring for owner's dog boarded at kennel. Kennel worker's allegations that dog owner failed to disclose that dog was predisposed to bite and attack people could be relevant on retrial to common law strict liability and negligence causes of action. This action may be maintained if owner of a domestic animal that bites or injures another person knew or had reason to know of animal's vicious propensities.

Veterinarian's rule under which dog owners who contract with veterinarians to treat their dogs are exempt from liability, should their dog bite a veterinarian during treatment, also bars kennel worker's strict liability claim against a dog owner under Civil Code Sec. 3342 for injuries sustained from a dog bite or attack while worker was caring for owner's dog boarded at kennel. Kennel worker's allegations that dog owner failed to disclose that dog was predisposed to bite and attack people could be relevant on retrial to common law strict liability and negligence causes of action. This action may be maintained if owner of a domestic animal that bites or injures another person knew or had reason to know of animal's vicious propensities.

Party to arbitration agreement may be compelled to submit to arbitration a dispute that turns solely on issue of statutory interpretation.

Building materials purchased by contractor at homeowner's behest so that contractor would add them to homeowner's existing residence were not purchased "as part of real estate covered by a written warranty" within meaning of federal regulation and thus were consumer products for purposes of Magnuson-Moss Warranty-Federal Trade Commission Improvement Act. Duration of implied warranty of merchantability under Magnuson-Moss is determined by state law, and in California is one year.

In instructing jurors on definition of offenses involving misappropriation of public funds in violation of Penal Code Sec. 424, judge correctly advised that an official is guilty if he or she "appropriated public moneys, or any portion thereof, to his or her own use. Or to the use of another without authority of law" and if the defendant "loaned the same or any portion thereof, made any profit out of, or used the same for any purpose not authorized by law."

In instructing jurors on definition of offenses involving misappropriation of public funds in violation of Penal Code Sec. 424, judge correctly advised that an official is guilty if he or she "appropriated public moneys, or any portion thereof, to his or her own use. Or to the use of another without authority of law" and if the defendant "loaned the same or any portion thereof, made any profit out of, or used the same for any purpose not authorized by law."

Where arbitrator issued decision pursuant to parties' agreement to submit disputes to binding arbitration in which arbitrator must apply California law, trial court lacked jurisdiction to hear appeal of arbitrator's decision on ground that arbitrator failed to correctly apply California law.