CA Unpub Decisions

Rebecca Eisenhauer appeals from an order dismissing her complaint after the trial court sustained a demurrer. Eisenhauer lived in a “marriage-like relationship” with Gerold Skillstad for five years before Skillstad’s death. Eisenhauer alleged that Skillstad promised he would provide for her for the rest of her life and would leave her his assets. However, when Skillstad died, respondent Carolyn Wooley—Skillstad’s daughter and the successor trustee of Skillstad’s trust—allegedly refused to honor Skillstad’s promise and instead transferred Skillstad’s assets to her own trust.

Rebecca Eisenhauer appeals from an order dismissing her complaint after the trial court sustained a demurrer. Eisenhauer lived in a “marriage-like relationship” with Gerold Skillstad for five years before Skillstad’s death. Eisenhauer alleged that Skillstad promised he would provide for her for the rest of her life and would leave her his assets. However, when Skillstad died, respondent Carolyn Wooley—Skillstad’s daughter and the successor trustee of Skillstad’s trust—allegedly refused to honor Skillstad’s promise and instead transferred Skillstad’s assets to her own trust.

Mother appeals orders declaring her three children dependents of the juvenile court and removing the children from her physical custody. She also challenges an order imposing a monitored visitation restriction. The evidence showed mother was a current abuser of methamphetamine, she used the drug with her youngest child’s father (who was barred from contact with mother under a domestic violence restraining order), and the children had suffered emotional trauma from the tumultuous home environment.

Yusuf Abdullateef Askia was convicted of assault with force likely to produce great bodily injury. (Pen. Code, § 245, subd. (a)(4).) On review, we conclude (1) Askia’s Miranda rights were not violated when an officer asked “what happened?” at the crime scene; (2) the court properly refused an instruction on defense of property; and (3) no coercion occurred when the court told the deadlocked jury to continue deliberations. The Attorney General concedes, and we agree, that a one-year sentence enhancement must be stricken. (§ 667.5, subd. (b).) With a modified prison sentence, we affirm.

In April 2010, defendants and appellants Chendareth Tony Meas and Sophorn J. Moeum, along with six accomplices, participated in a violent robbery at an auto parts store that resulted in two fatalities. Defendants were found guilty of multiple felonies, including murder and attempted murder. In 2014, we affirmed defendants’ convictions after modifying the judgments to address several sentencing errors. (People v. Kol (June 13, 2014, B243664 [nonpub. opn.].)

A consumer purchased a product from a national retail pharmacy that did not make the text of the manufacturer’s written warranty available for review before purchase as required under the federal Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act (Magnuson-Moss) (15 U.S.C. § 2301 et seq.). The consumer brought an action against the pharmacy seeking injunctive relief under the Unfair Competition Law (UCL) (Bus. & Prof. Code, § 17200 et seq.) based on the violation of federal warranty law. In summary judgment proceedings, the consumer declared that she did not know she had a right to review the warranty before making her purchase, she would have reviewed the warranty if the seller had made it available as required by federal law, and she would not have purchased the product after she learned the warranty was limited to replacement parts.

Defendant, cross-complainant, and appellant Mitchell Pletcher appeals from a post-judgment order denying his motion to vacate a judgment under Code of Civil Procedure section 663. Because Pletcher’s notice of appeal was filed more than 180 days after Pletcher’s timely motion to vacate was denied by operation of law, we dismiss the appeal as untimely.

This is the fourth proceeding before this court in the defamation action brought by plaintiff Todd McNair against the National Collegiate Athletic Association (the NCAA). The lawsuit arose from the NCAA’s finding that McNair, a former assistant coach for the University of Southern California (USC) football team, violated ethical conduct regulations during the NCAA’s investigation into whether team member Reggie Bush received improper benefits while he was a student-athlete at USC. In this appeal, the NCAA challenges the trial court’s declaratory judgment and its order granting McNair’s motion for new trial. We hold that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in finding insufficient evidence to justify the verdict on falsity. Accordingly, we affirm the new trial order and do not address the NCAA’s challenge to the declaratory judgment.

A jury convicted defendant and appellant Oscar Israel Duenas of assault with a deadly weapon on one victim and criminal threats against another. The jury found gun, gang, and great bodily injury allegations true. Duenas appealed. In February 2018 we affirmed Duenas’s conviction but remanded the case for resentencing. (People v. Duenas (Feb. 21, 2018, B266480) [nonpub. opn.] (Duenas I).) The trial court resentenced Duenas in October 2018 and he again appealed. In that second appeal, the People conceded the trial court had erred in its resentencing by choosing as the principal count a count that had been dismissed. At oral argument in November 2019, counsel advised us the trial court had again resentenced Duenas on October 7, 2019, while the case was on appeal, and Duenas had filed another notice of appeal on that same date.

After a jury found defendants’ conduct was not a substantial factor in causing plaintiff’s injuries, plaintiff moved for a new trial on the ground of jury misconduct, offering her attorney’s declaration concerning a post-trial conversation with a juror as the sole supporting evidence. (See Code Civ. Proc., § 657, subd. (2).) The trial court denied the motion because it was not supported by an affidavit with admissible evidence of juror misconduct. (See § 658; Evid. Code, § 1150.) Plaintiff contends the court abused its discretion. We disagree and affirm.

Cameron Neil Whitlock contends the trial court erred in declining to accept letters and statements from his family and friends for purposes of a post-conviction proceeding to preserve evidence relevant to a youth offender parole hearing. (Pen. Code, § 3051; see People v. Franklin (2016) 63 Cal.4th 261, 284 (Franklin); In re Cook (2019) 7 Cal.5th 439, 451-453 (Cook).) The People agree that the trial court erred with respect to some of the evidence but also argue that two documents should be excluded. We conclude the court should have admitted all of the documents and reverse.

Appellants own a six-unit building in the city of San Francisco, which they seek to convert to condominium ownership. Respondent City and County of San Francisco (the City) denied their application on grounds including that they had recently displaced an elderly resident and had provided false information to the City. Appellants then sought a writ of mandate in the trial court to overturn this decision, which the trial court denied. We shall reverse the judgment.

A jury convicted defendant of felony driving under the influence of alcohol causing injury and felony driving with a 0.08 percent blood-alcohol content causing injury. As to both counts, the jury found true defendant inflicted great bodily injury. On appeal, defendant contends the trial court erroneously denied her Penal Code section 17, subdivision (b) (section 17(b)) motion to reduce her felony convictions to misdemeanors because the court was not aware it had the discretion to do so. She further contends the court failed to adequately investigate defense claims that one of the jurors had slept during portions of the trial. We disagree and affirm.

A jury convicted defendant Osvaldo Vallejo of two counts of robbery, and single counts of aggravated assault, criminal threats, and brandishing a weapon. It also found defendant personally used a dangerous and deadly weapon in the commission of the robberies. Defendant separately admitted allegations he had suffered a prior strike and a prior serious felony conviction.