CA Pub. Decisions

A decision as to judgment entered on her guilty plea and following the imposition of sentence upon revocation of her probation. Appellant's counsel has asked this court for an independent review of the record to determine whether there are any arguable issues.

Where defendant father capitalized limited liability company of which he was 99 percent owner and plaintiff daughter was one percent owner and subsequently withdrew the contents of plaintiff's capital account. Trial court erred in granting summary judgment to defendant in action for accounting where ruling was based solely on defendant's declaration that he intended the capitalization funds as a loan, not a gift. Triable issue existed as to defendant's intent where plaintiff declared that defendant had never mentioned any loan and often told plaintiff and her siblings that he had "given" them investments. The defendant presented no evidence regarding the terms of the loan nor any evidence that plaintiff ever agreed to any terms. Trial court erred in declining to compel defendant to produce documents and answer questions about the assets of limited liability company of which plaintiff was part owner. Where California residents own--in aggregate--25 percent or more of a foreign limited liability company, each of those residents has inspection rights, and trial court erred in construing statute as limiting those rights to persons owning at least 25 percent of the company. Trial court abused its discretion when it denied plaintiff leave to amend her complaint to add claims for conversion and breach of fiduciary duty where the plaintiff did not seek to introduce new factual allegations or new claims of primary rights and defendant did not show he would be prejudiced.

Appeal from an order of the trial court denying their special motion to strike under the anti-SLAPP statute. Appellants contend plaintiffs failed to satisfy their burden of demonstrating a probability of prevailing on the merits. Court disagree and affirm the order.

Where minor committed battery but turned 18 before restitution order requiring payment to victim was made in juvenile proceedings, Welfare and Institutions Code Sec. 730.7--which imposes joint and several parental liability where a minor is ordered to make restitution--applies. Date of the offense is the operative date for Sec. 730.7 purposes.

A modification decision.

Where county notified injured county hospital employee in letter that her temporary work restrictions were not compatible with her then-current work assignment and that she was being removed from regular payroll but did not evince intent to sever employment therelationship. The county offered the employee vocational rehabilitation for a different position and to subsequent retirement application demonstrated to her that the hospital's letter placed her on leave but did not terminate her. The employee was not "effectively dismissed" on ground of permanent disability as of date of letter from hospital and was thus ineligible for reinstatement with back pay pursuant to County Employees Retirement Law.

Surety for bond has no time constraints in which to move to exonerate bond where defendant, within 180 days of notice of his bail forfeiture, is arrested outside county where underlying case is located. Where, a day after court forfeited defendant's bond following his failure to appear for hearing on drug charges, defendant was arrested in another county on same drug case. The trial court was not required to exonerate bond on its own motion when defendant was taken into custody. But the court erred in denying surety's motions that were brought more than 185 days after receiving notice of forfeiture to set aside summary judgment and exonerate bond.

Where a minor under age of 14 was placed in a deferred entry of judgment program pursuant to a plea bargain. The court was not estopped from vacating order when it realized minor did not meet program's age requirement.

Trial Jury Selection and Management Act does not permit trial court to reopen jury selection after the trial jury has been impaneled. Even if alternates have not yet been sworn.

EPA administrative proceedings, a prerequisite to bringing a civil action in federal court against alleged polluter under Clean Water Act, were not suits within meaning of liability policies that define suit as, "a civil proceeding in which damages...to which this insurance applies are alleged." Insurers had no duty to provide defense or coverage to quarry operator accused of placing dirt and rocks in creek bed where policies excluded coverage for "monitoring, cleaning up, removing, containing, treating, detoxifying or neutralizing, or in any way responding to, or assessing the effects of pollutants."

EPA administrative proceedings, a prerequisite to bringing a civil action in federal court against alleged polluter under Clean Water Act, were not suits within meaning of liability policies that define suit as "a civil proceeding in which damages...to which this insurance applies are alleged." Insurers had no duty to provide defense or coverage to quarry operator accused of placing dirt and rocks in creek bed where policies excluded coverage for, "monitoring, cleaning up, removing, containing, treating, detoxifying or neutralizing, or in any way responding to, or assessing the effects of pollutants."

Where plaintiff acted as promptly as was reasonably possible to establish that he was the father of his girlfriend's child. The mother's conduct had unilaterally precluded plaintiff from meeting the statutory requirements for the status of presumed father and the mother did not marry her husband until after said child was conceived. The presumed father status of mother's husband did not bar plaintiff's action to establish himself as child's father. Where plaintiff was wrongly denied opportunity to meet requirements for presumed father status, the trial court did not err in ordering genetic testing on its own motion or in admitting results to resolve whether voluntary declaration of paternity by mother's husband should be set aside. Trial court abused discretion in ruling that plaintiff had established paternity on basis of test results without weighing competing factors favoring a finding that mother's husband was the father. Even though husband was not a party to the proceedings, mother had standing to claim that her husband was child's presumed father under statutory presumptions, and husband's voluntary declaration should not have been set aside without joining him.

Before a juvenile court may terminate a presumed father's parental rights over his child, the juvenile court must find by clear and convincing evidence that the presumed father is unfit.

Where probate order provided for after-discovered assets of decedent to be distributed proportionally among four residual beneficiaries. Also including educational institution with tax-exempt status and executor claimed charitable income tax deduction for portion of after-discovered income attributable to institution's share of estate, institution was exempt from liability for income tax attributable to its portion of after-discovered assets, and trial court abused its discretion in failing to allocate tax liability only among other three beneficiaries.