CA Unpub Decisions

Plaintiff prevailed on one of his two claims for violation of the Unruh Civil Rights Act (Civ. Code, S 51), and the trial court awarded him statutory damages (id., S 52, subd. (a)). Plintiff then moved for recovery of attorney fees under Civil Code section 52, subdivision (a). The trial court awarded Plaintiff attorney fees, but at a far lower amount than he requested. Plaintiff appealed.

Defendant appeals from the judgment sending him to prison for nine years after a jury found appellant assaulted his former girlfriend's boyfriend with his truck.Appellant contends on appeal that the trial court had a sua sponte duty to instruct the jury using CALJIC No. 5.32, "Use of Force in Defense of Another." court affirm.

A crimnal law decision regarding conviction for possessing a concealed knife.

This is an appeal from an order that denied a motion for class certification. Plaintiff rought this action against respondent for unpaid overtime and related claims. Plaintiff argues the trial court applied improper criteria, made erroneous legal assumptions, and the order is not supported by the evidence. Court do not agree, and so affirm.

Plaintiff appeals from a judgment of nonsuit granted on her product liability lawsuit. Plaintiff contends the trial court completely gutted her case when it granted motions in limine excluding certain evidence and argument concerning the recall of a hip replacement shell similar to the one she received. Plaintiff also contends the trial court erred in quashing the subpoenas of two witnesses and refusing to grant a trial continuance when it became clear she needed additional deposition discovery before proceeding to trial.
Court conclude none of the trial court's rulings unfairly prejudiced appellant, and that the court properly granted nonsuit. Accordingly, court affirm.

Defendant pleaded guilty to various criminal offenses following the denial of his motion to suppress evidence. Appellant complains the investigating officer lacked reasonable suspicion to detain him and therefore the trial court should have suppressed the evidence seized during a subsequent search of his person. court agree defendant was illegally detained and the evidence should have been suppressed as a direct product of the detention. Accordingly, court reverse.

The dispute centers on whether the two entrepreneurs could open their sandwich shop given limited parking space serving the building. The entrepreneurs, plaintiffs, claimed in their complaint that a certain section of the Costa Mesa Municipal Code (S 13 to 89) requires that there be at least ten parking spaces for a food and beverage establishment with more than 300 square feet of public area, but, because of "restrictions of space and existing obligations" the building could not accommodate that required parking. According to the owner of the building, its manager, knew or should have known that their sandwich shop would require more than 300 square feet of public area, knew or should have known that the building did not have adequate legal parking, but didn't tell them, and in fact, by entering into the lease, "constructively represented" that there was enough space when there really wasn't.

Petitioner seeks an extraordinary writ to vacate the orders of the juvenile court removing his children, and setting a Welfare and Institutions Code section 366.26 hearing to implement a permanent plan of adoption. Court deny the petition.

Appellant, pled no contest to possession of cocaine and admitted four prior prison term enhancements. On October 17, 2005, the court struck two enhancements and sentenced Appellant to a four year term, the middle term of two years on the possession offense and 2 one year prior prison term enhancements.A ppellant's appellate counsel has filed a brief which summarizes the facts, with citations to the record, raises no issues, and asks this court to independently review the record.

The minor appeals from juvenile court dispositional orders adjudging him a ward of the court. Appellant contends there is insufficient evidence to support the court's finding that he possessed live ammunition in violation of Penal Code section 12101, subdivision (b)(1). On review, court affirm the disposition of the juvenile court.

A modification decision.

Appellant appeals from a judgment finding him guilty of attempted voluntary manslaughter with the personal use of a firearm, shooting at an occupied motor vehicle, and assault with a semiautomatic firearm with the personal use of a firearm. On review court affirm the judgment and correct a clerical error.

The failure of the Defendant's motion to directly address the plaintiffs' allegations that the Association was negligent in failing to comply with its obligations under the Covenants and Restrictions applicable to the development, court cannot conclude that the Association met its burden of showing that appellant's negligence action has no merit.

Sharon Denise Lee and Arthur Joseph Wagner pleaded guilty to commercial burglary in exchange for a grant of formal probation. In pleading guilty, both defendants signed and initialed a form entitled, Terms and Conditions of Felony Probation, which included a probation term requiring defendants to maintain . . . associates as approved by your probation officer. Defendants contend, and the Attorney General agrees, the probation condition is unconstitutionally vague because it does not require advance notice to the defendants of whom the probation officer disapproves. Judgment affirmed.