CA Pub. Decisions

Communications by letter, e-mail, and telephone in which student who was subject of alleged sexual harassment, her father, and their attorney told school principal that they were upset. They wanted to meet with the principal and legal counsel in order to "resolve this situation," and because school officials did not meet with them, they would proceed with "the legal process".

Defendants' successful motion to quash a jury venire and begin jury selection again with a new panel of prospective jurors was not a "mistrial" motion. Despite the defendants' initially having labeled it as such, and, because the prosecution was not prejudiced, it did not trigger a new 60-day period in which defendants could be "brought to trial" under Penal Code Sec. 1382(a)(2).

Where defendant who prevailed in a car accident--related negligence suit failed in subsequent malicious prosecution action alleging plaintiff lacked probable cause to claim defendant negligently caused the accident. The plaintiff later brought a malicious prosecution action against defendant alleging her malicious prosecution claim had lacked basis. The court properly denied defendant's anti-SLAPP motion as to plaintiff's malicious prosecution claim where--even though defendant had clearly engaged in protected activity when pursuing her malicious prosecution claim--plaintiff demonstrated probability of being able to establish that defendant at time of filing malicious prosecution suit did not have probable cause to believe that plaintiff had lacked probable cause for believing defendant was liable. Plaintiff is not entitled to sanctions for frivolous appeal unless all reasonable attorneys would agree appeal was totally without merit.

Settled-statement procedure cannot be used to settle record with respect to contents of video and audiotapes of defendant's police interrogation since such statements are not part of the "oral proceedings" of the court, even if they were introduced as evidence and played at trial.

Settled-statement procedure cannot be used to settle record with respect to contents of video and audiotapes of defendant's police interrogation since such statements are not part of the "oral proceedings" of the court, even if they were introduced as evidence and played at trial.

Where plaintiffs filed mandamus action against city seeking to compel it to investigate an unreported change in ownership of property and reassess it for property tax purposes, which suit was a catalyst to city action resulting in great increase in property tax revenue, but plaintiffs did not prevail in writ action, plaintiffs were not entitled to recover attorney fees where, prior to filing writ action, plaintiffs gave no notice to city of their intent to file suit, did not disclose location of property to city or grounds for finding an ownership change, and did not attempt to settle the matter short of litigation.

Where plaintiffs filed mandamus action against city seeking to compel it to investigate an unreported change in ownership of property and reassess it for property tax purposes, which suit was a catalyst to city action resulting in great increase in property tax revenue, but plaintiffs did not prevail in writ action, plaintiffs were not entitled to recover attorney fees where, prior to filing writ action, plaintiffs gave no notice to city of their intent to file suit, did not disclose location of property to city or grounds for finding an ownership change, and did not attempt to settle the matter short of litigation.

Where plaintiffs filed mandamus action against city seeking to compel it to investigate an unreported change in ownership of property and reassess it for property tax purposes, which suit was a catalyst to city action resulting in great increase in property tax revenue, but plaintiffs did not prevail in writ action, plaintiffs were not entitled to recover attorney fees where, prior to filing writ action, plaintiffs gave no notice to city of their intent to file suit, did not disclose location of property to city or grounds for finding an ownership change, and did not attempt to settle the matter short of litigation.

Corporation delivering stock to state controller's office under escheat provisions of the Unclaimed Property Law is absolutely immune from owner's suit for recovery of the stock, for interest, for damages stemming from the delivery of the stock, or for any similar type of liability.

A person may aid and abet a murder after fatal blow is struck as long as aiding and abetting occurs before victim dies. In trial of defendant who aided and abetted murder principal after he struck fatal blow to victim but before victim died, trial court did not err in failing to instruct jury sua sponte that murder is complete when fatal blow is struck even if victim lingers for substantial period of time. Trial court did not err in failing to instruct jury sua sponte on defense of mistake of fact where defendant never mentioned mistake of fact as defense theory. When court in response to jury's request instructed it that "directly and actively" committing crime meant "actually performing an act or acts which constitute a crime," trial court did not err in failing to also instruct them sua sponte on proximate cause where they never indicated desire to be informed on causation, and causation was not an issue in case. Trial court did not err in excluding evidence that defense witness expected to be sentenced to life imprisonment without possibility of parole where evidence would not have supported witness's credibility.

Where allegedly dependent child's whereabouts were unknown, juvenile court had jurisdiction to set the matter for periodic review hearings as required by law and to take such further acts as might be necessary to secure the return of the child but lacked jurisdiction to make custody determinations.

Garage of a private residence that was not accessible to the general public was not a public area within the meaning of section of the Juvenile Drug Trafficking and Schoolyard Act of 1988 providing for an enhanced sentence for certain drug crimes taking place, "in any public area or business establishment where minors are legally permitted to conduct business which is located within 1,000 feet of any public or private elementary, vocational, junior high, or high school."

A modification decision.

Where there was no direct or opinion testimony that rounds of ammunition were live. No testimony that removal of rounds from the gun during booking was necessary for safety purposes and the trial court did not inspect rounds or make an effort to test fire the handgun or any of its bullets. Evidence was not sufficient enough to support minor's conviction for possession of live ammunition.