CA Unpub Decisions

Plaintiff and respondent, City of Riverside (the City), sued defendants and appellants, Symons Ambulance and Symons Emergency Specialties, Inc. (collectively, Symons), for operating ambulance services in violation of the Riverside Municipal Code (RMC). The trial court granted a preliminary injunction prohibiting Symons from operating in violation of the RMC. On appeal from that order, Symons contends the local ordinance at issue is invalid under the Emergency Medical Services (EMS) System and the Prehospital Emergency Medical Care Personnel Act (EMS Act). (Health & Saf. Code, § 1797 et seq.) It also argues the local ordinance violates federal antitrust law and is therefore invalid. We conclude the City demonstrated through undisputed evidence that it is likely to prevail on the merits of its cause of action, and Symons failed to show the invalidity of the local ordinance. We thus hold the court did not err in granting the preliminary injunction and affirm.

A juvenile court found true allegations that defendant Joel S. (minor) committed the offenses of petty theft (Pen. Code, §§ 484, subd. (a), 488) and possession of an alcoholic beverage by a minor (Bus. & Prof. Code, § 25662, subd. (a)). The court declared him a nonward of the court, placed him on probation, in the custody of his parents, and ordered him to perform 20 hours of community service. On appeal, minor contends there was insufficient evidence to support the court’s conclusion that he committed petty theft. We affirm the order.

J.M. (Mother) appeals orders of the juvenile court after it terminated her parental rights to her child B.R., a minor coming under the juvenile court law. (Welf. & Inst. Code, § 366.26.) We conclude, among other things, that the court did not err by finding that the beneficial relationship exception to adoption does not apply in this case. We affirm.

David Fee appeals judgment after an order sustaining without leave to amend the demurrer of Select Portfolio Servicing, Inc. (SPS) and U.S. Bank National Association as Trustee for WAMU Mortgage Pass Through Certificate for WMALT Series 2007-OA3 (U.S. Bank). By his complaint Fee sought, among other things, to rescind a mortgage loan under the federal Truth in Lending Act (TILA). (15 U.S.C. § 1601 et seq.) We affirm.

David Fee appeals judgment after an order sustaining without leave to amend the demurrer of JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. (Chase) to a cause of action for rescission and declaratory relief under the Truth in Lending Act (TILA). (15 U.S.C. § 1601 et seq.) The trial court abated Fee’s causes of action for declaratory relief, negligence, and violation of the Homeowner’s Bill of Rights pending resolution of the appeal in another case that involves the same loan, the same property, and similar claims. We recently resolved that appeal against Fee. (Fee v. JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A., et al. (Mar. 21, 2017, B263042) [nonpub. opn.] [affirming judgment after dispositive orders against Fee on all causes of action].)

On April 2, 1998, appellant Anthony Dwayne Thompson was convicted of possession of a narcotic substance for sale in violation of Health and Safety Code section 11351. On August 3, 2016, after completing his sentence, appellant filed a form petition/application for resentencing pursuant to Penal Code section 1170.18, subdivision (f) to reclassify that felony conviction to a misdemeanor.
On August 15, 2016, the trial court denied the application, finding that appellant did not qualify for relief. The court found the felony conviction could not be reduced to a misdemeanor, as “[i]t’s an 11351 of the Health and Safety Code.”

Dorothy Jean Jennings (Mother) died in February 2006, leaving two adult sons Edward King (Edward) and Miles King (Miles). During the next eight years, Edward and Miles engaged in high-conflict probate litigation. Edward served as one of two executors until he resigned in 2010. In February 2014, the probate court issued an order approving the final estate accounting. Miles appealed, and this court affirmed the order in an unpublished opinion. (Estate of Jennings (Apr. 24, 2015, D065745) (Jennings II).)

In this products liability case, plaintiffs Kawika Demara (Demara) and Sandra Demara (together, Plaintiffs) appeal from a summary judgment granted in favor of defendants The Raymond Corporation (Raymond) and Raymond Handling Solutions, Inc. (RHSI) (together, Defendants). As relevant to this appeal, Plaintiffs asserted claims for strict liability and negligence based on injuries Demara suffered allegedly as a result of design defects in a forklift designed by Raymond and sold by RHSI.

Appellant David Cunningham is a minority shareholder of JR Group, Inc. (JR Group), which is a franchise of Keller Williams Realty Inc. (Keller Williams), a real estate brokerage. Among other claims against other parties, he brought a cause of action on behalf of JR Group under a shareholder-derivative theory against Northern California Region, LLC (NCR), a company that contracted with Keller Williams to manage aspects of its relationship with JR Group.

Bayview Hunters Point Arts Council (plaintiff) appeals after the trial court granted the motion for summary judgment of the City and County of San Francisco (defendant or City) in this action arising from the San Francisco Arts Commission’s alleged violation of the San Francisco Sunshine Ordinance (S.F. Admin. Code, § 67.1 et seq.), which requires that “[a]ll meetings of any policy body shall be open and public.” (§ 67.5.) On appeal, plaintiff contends there are triable issues of material fact regarding whether the Arts Commission violated section 67.5 when it failed to provide advance notice of and allow public comment at a June 25, 2013 meeting of a review panel at which recipients of an arts grant were purportedly selected because the panel was a “policy body” created “by the initiative of” the Arts Commission, pursuant to section 67.3(d)(4), which means it was subject to section 67.5’s open meeting requirements.

Real parties in interest Newport Banning Ranch LLC, Area Energy LLC, and Cherokee Newport Beach, LLC proposed to develop a portion of the approximately 400-acre property, commonly known as Banning Ranch, for residential and commercial purposes, while preserving the remaining acreage as open space and parks (the Project). The City of Newport Beach and its City Council (collectively the City) approved the Project. Banning Ranch Conservancy (the Conservancy), “a community-based organization dedicated to the preservation, acquisition, conservation and management of the entire Banning Ranch as a permanent public open space, park, and coastal nature preserve,” filed a mandamus action against the City.

Anatoly Smolkin was convicted by a San Francisco jury of multiple counts of stalking (Pen. Code, § 646.9, subd. (a)) against 11 different victims; multiple violations of restraining orders (§ 646.9, subd. (b)); making criminal threats (§ 422) against nine different victims; making threats to an executive officer (§ 69); battery on a peace officer (§ 243, subd. (b)); disruptive presence at a school (§ 626.8, subd. (a)); and 15 counts of contempt of court by violating a civil harassment restraining order (§ 166, subd. (a)(4)). The case apparently involved Smolkin calling, e-mailing and threatening 23 individuals over a two-month period after he was terminated by his employer. In April 2013, the trial court sentenced Smolkin to a total determinate term of seven years in state prison. The court imposed a 10-year criminal protective order prohibiting Smolkin from entering the City of San Francisco and ordering him to stay 150 yards away from the Tishman Speyer Building at One Bu

In 2010, Hamza Sharif pleaded guilty to one count of robbery (Pen. Code, § 211) and admitted two serious/violent felony prior convictions (§ 667, subds. (b)-(i)). Sharif was ultimately sentenced to a determinate term of 10 years in prison.
Apparently, Sharif petitioned for relief under Proposition 47 (§ 1170.18, the Safe Neighborhoods and Schools Act). We have a copy of the order, dated May 29, 2015, denying the petition for reclassification of Sharif's robbery conviction.

Darryl Brown appeals his conviction by plea to second degree robbery. (Pen. Code, § 212.5, subd. (c).) Pursuant to the negotiated plea, appellant admitted a prior strike conviction (§§ 667, subds. (b) - (i), 1170.12, subds. (a) - (d)) and a prior serious felony conviction (§ 667, subd. (a)(1)), and was sentenced to nine years state prison. Appellant was ordered to pay, among other things, a $300 restitution fine (§ 1202.4, subd. (b)), a $300 parole revocation fine (§ 1202.45), a $40 court operations assessment (§ 1465.8, subd. (a)(1)), a $30 criminal conviction assessment (Gov. Code, § 70373), and a $10 crime prevention fine (§ 1202.5).