CA Unpub Decisions

Actress Paz de la Huerta appeals from the order partially granting an anti-SLAPP motion as to claims based on the use of a voice double. The voice double was used to dub over her lines in a film. She also appeals from the judgment following the grant of a demurrer as to claims based on a stunt during which she was injured. Appellant argues that she sufficiently showed she could prevail on her voice-dubbing claims, and that her stunt-based claims fall under exceptions to the workers’ compensation exclusivity rule. We disagree and affirm.

In a case in which a worker alleged that his employer had failed to pay him any wages for a period of more than four years, the trial court entered judgment for the employee and ordered the employer to pay damages, attorney’s fees and costs. The employer appeals only the award of attorney’s fees. Finding no abuse of discretion by the trial court, we affirm.

One year after recording a notice of default, CIT Bank, N.A. foreclosed on Monica Radoci’s home. At the time of the foreclosure Radoci was behind on her loan payments, and CIT had offered her a loan modification, which she declined. Radoci filed this action for wrongful foreclosure, negligence, unfair competition, and other causes of action against CIT and Fannie Mae. The trial court sustained demurrers by CIT and Fannie Mae to Radoci’s second amended complaint without leave to amend. Radoci appeals from the judgment dismissing CIT. We affirm.

Sharon Gaither, individually and as personal representative of the Estate of Chaz Lamar Gaither (appellant), appeals from a judgment dismissing a medical malpractice complaint against respondent Alicia Montañez, M.D., following the trial court’s order granting respondent’s motion for summary judgment. Appellant argues the court erred in granting summary judgment, as respondent’s expert’s opinion failed to meet respondent’s burden to make a prima facie showing of the nonexistence of any triable issue of material fact. For the reasons set forth below, we affirm.

On October 7, 2013, a jury convicted Aqualina Jaime (Jaime) of (among other offenses) four counts of theft of access card information, in violation of Penal Code section 484e, subdivision (d). The court struck three of those convictions at sentencing. On June 10, 2015, the trial court denied Jaime’s petition to have the remaining section 484e, subdivision (d) offense reclassified as a misdemeanor under section 1170.18, enacted pursuant to Proposition 47. Jaime appealed, and we affirmed.

In 2015, a jury found defendant and appellant Cameron Brown guilty of the first degree murder of his four-year-old daughter, Lauren Key. The jury found true the special circumstance allegations that the murder was intentional and carried out for financial gain, and that it was committed by means of lying in wait. Brown had been tried twice before. The two previous proceedings resulted in mistrials due to deadlocked juries.
On appeal, Brown contends the third trial was barred by the prohibition against double jeopardy. He further argues the judgment must be reversed because of erroneous trial court evidentiary rulings, prosecutorial misconduct, and ineffective assistance of counsel. We strike the parole revocation fine but otherwise find no reversible error and affirm the judgment.

The Housing Authority of the City of Los Angeles (Housing Authority) appeals from a judgment granting a petition for writ of mandate directing the Housing Authority to set aside its decision terminating participation by Howard K. Carruth in the Section 8 housing program. We affirm.

Defendants Gabriel Solis and Kristhian Perez appeal from judgments of conviction entered after a jury trial. The jury convicted defendants of second degree robbery (Pen. Code, § 211) and found true the allegation that the crime was committed for the benefit of a criminal street gang (§ 186.22, subd. (b)(1)(C)). The trial court sentenced Solis to the lower term of two years plus 10 years for the criminal street gang enhancement. It sentenced Perez to the upper term of five years plus 10 years for the criminal street gang enhancement.

Plaintiff Mauricio Rosilho and defendant David Li-Min Young are Brazilian residents and former business partners who co-owned two parcels of real property in the City of San Gabriel. In August 2003, Rosilho’s interests in the San Gabriel properties were conveyed via grant deeds to Young. Co-defendant Jimmy Chen notarized the grant deeds. Shortly thereafter, the properties were sold to a third party. In March 2011, Rosilho sued Young, alleging that he had never agreed to transfer the properties, that the transfers were fraudulent, and that Young had improperly concealed the transfers from him. Rosilho also sued notary Chen, alleging that Chen had conspired with Young to conceal the fraudulent transfers, that Chen and Young had conspired to destroy Chen’s notary books, and that Chen had destroyed the notary books allegedly documenting the transfers.

Anna C. was born with drugs in her system and removed from her parents’ care at six weeks old. Reunification services were terminated about nine months later. Prior to the Welfare and Institutions Code section 366.26 hearing on termination of parental rights, Anna’s father, Manuel C. (Father), filed a section 388 petition seeking additional reunification services. The court denied his petition without a hearing and terminated parental rights. We affirm.

In this appeal from jurisdictional and dispositional orders in dependency proceedings, Melinda M. (Mother), who resides in Nevada and left her children in California without providing for their support, argues that that the juvenile court lacked subject matter jurisdiction under the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act (UCCJEA) (Fam. Code, § 3400 et seq.). We conclude that the juvenile court had temporary emergency jurisdiction under the UCCJEA when the children were abandoned, and that after a court hearing at which counsel, a Nevada state court magistrate, and child welfare agencies from California and Nevada were present in person or by telephone, the juvenile court properly assumed permanent jurisdiction under the UCCJEA.

Defendant David Elden Rouse challenges the trial court’s imposition of a fine in apparent excess of the statutorily maximum fine that may be imposed under Vehicle Code section 23550. We remand to the trial court for clarification.

In this action to set aside a foreclosure, plaintiff and appellant Patricia Gill (Gill) appeals from the entry of judgment in favor of defendant Bank of America, N.A. (Bank) after the trial court granted the Bank’s motion for summary judgment. We affirm.

Defendant Fletcher Carson appeals from a judgment after a jury trial in a residential unlawful detainer action. His landlord sued him for unlawful detainer after he failed to pay $28,000 in rent, and Carson defended by asserting that the house was uninhabitable and the eviction was in retaliation for complaints he made about the condition of the premises. The jury rejected those defenses and found in favor of the landlord. Carson contends the judgment should be reversed because the special verdict form was defective and there was insufficient evidence to support the verdict. For the reasons explained, we will affirm.