CA Pub. Decisions

A decision regarding first degree burglary, petty theft, and possession of stolen property.

A decision regarding unenforceability of settlement agreement.

A decision regarding forfeiting bail on the grounds that the bond it issued in this matter was void from the outset.

A decision regarding distribution of community property, confirmed separate property, and spousal support.

A decision regarding possession of cocaine base in violation of Health and Safety Code.

A decision regarding transportation, sale or furnishing methamphetamine under Health and Safety Code, section 11379, subdivision (a) (count 1), possession of methamphetamine for sale under Health and Safety Code.

A decision regarding disability discrimination in violation of the Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA), and wrongful termination in violation of public policy.

A decision regarding disability discrimination in violation of the Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA), and wrongful termination in violation of public policy.

Client's allegation that attorney--after filing an administrative complaint against client's employer with the Department of Fair Employment and Housing and telling client that the case would take a very long time and that attorney would call her or send her a letter--had no contact with client for almost three years raised triable issues of fact as to whether attorney continued to represent client during that time, which would toll the limitations period, and whether such "continuing representation" was for a period sufficient to make client's malpractice action timely.

In medical malpractice suit pertaining to post-surgery injury, where plaintiff submitted an expert declaration that defendant's preoperative evaluation fell below accepted standard of care and that surgery was premature and unnecessary, there was sufficient evidence to put element of causation in issue and trial court erred in granting defendant's motion for summary judgment.

Specific intent element of Penal Code Sec. 186.22 (b)(1), which mandates sentence enhancements for any person convicted of a felony committed "for the benefit of, at the direction of, or in association with any criminal street gang, with the specific intent to promote, further, or assist in any criminal conduct by gang members," does not require intent to further criminal conduct beyond presently charged crime. Where defendant was charged with murder and attempted murder, and evidence showed he intended to shoot people, intended to help another man shoot people, and knew another man was a fellow gang member, Sec. 186.22 specific intent requirement was satisfied.

A modification decision.

Where concerned citizen followed defendant, who was driving dangerously and under the influence of alcohol, through city streets before defendant sped away and citizen called police; police went to house and spoke to defendant, who remained inside the house and was visibly intoxicated; defendant refused to come outside to have his blood tested for the presence of alcohol; and police became anxious about the dissipation of alcohol in his bloodstream, exigent circumstances supported officers' warrantless entry into home in order to effectuate arrest for drunk driving.

Where concerned citizen followed defendant, who was driving dangerously and under the influence of alcohol, through city streets before defendant sped away and citizen called police; police went to house and spoke to defendant, who remained inside the house and was visibly intoxicated; defendant refused to come outside to have his blood tested for the presence of alcohol; and police became anxious about the dissipation of alcohol in his bloodstream, exigent circumstances supported officers' warrantless entry into home in order to effectuate arrest for drunk driving.