California Court of Appeal unpublished opinions (not citable under CRC 8.1115).
-
In re M.T. CA2/4
Oct 5, 2022
Because the sole issue on appeal relates to compliance with ICWA, we limit our summary of the facts to those relevant to that issue except as necessary for context. Father had sole physical custody of M.T. pursuant to a custody order issued in 2019, at the termination of a previo…
-
Brooks v. AmeriHome Mortgage Co. CA2/6
Oct 5, 2022
Brooks was an employee of AmeriHome. In January 2019, Brooks submitted a PAGA notice (§ 2699.3) to the Labor and Workforce Development Agency (LWDA) alleging violations for failure to (1) pay minimum and overtime wages, (2) provide meal periods and rest breaks, (3) timely pay wag…
-
Ewart v. County of Los Angeles CA2/7
Oct 5, 2022
Allison Ewart was hit by a car and seriously injured when Widge Galloway, serving as a volunteer traffic control officer for Los Angeles County during a triathlon, directed an automobile to turn into Ewart’s path. Although Ewart prevailed at trial in her negligence action against…
-
Michelman v. City of L.A. CA2/2
Oct 5, 2022
In 2017, plaintiff was an Uber driver. Plaintiff had immigrated to the United States from Asia. On October 2, 2017, plaintiff picked up a passenger who appeared to be of Korean descent and who used the name “Maverick.” After plaintiff refused to use the passenger’s preferred rout…
-
Shumate v. American Honda Motor Co. CA2/8
Oct 5, 2022
Richard Finley Shumate was involved in a multi-car collision and brought a products liability case against the distributor of his car, American Honda Motor Co., Inc. The case culminated in summary judgment for Honda. We affirm because Shumate failed to raise a triable issue of ma…
-
Engage BDR v. Amobee CA2/8
Oct 5, 2022
A firm called Engage BDR, LLC entered a Master Agreement requiring it to remit payments to Amobee, Inc. When Engage repeatedly failed to pay, the parties entered a succession of five more agreements that gave Engage more time to pay but increased its debt to Amobee. Engage paid m…
-
Hollander v. XL America Group CA2/1
Oct 5, 2022
1. On page 25, the first paragraph of footnote 19 is modified to read as follows: “In their respondents’ brief, defendants do not argue expressly that Gail waived or forfeited her claim of instructional error by failing specifically to request an instruction that the Hollanders w…
-
P. v. Ulloarivera CA1/5
Oct 5, 2022
Ulloarivera lived in the home of 13-year-old M. Doe and her family, although by the time these events occurred he had moved into the garage. Doe’s mother observed Ulloarivera, then 28, flirting with Doe, and found suggestive text messages between the two. Doe admitted to her moth…
-
P. v. Craft CA1/4
Oct 5, 2022
Defendant was charged by an amended information with two counts of forcible rape (§ 261, subd. (a)(2)) and one count of forcible oral copulation (§ 288a, subd. (c)(2)(A)) against one victim, and with an additional count of forcible rape involving a second victim. The amended info…
-
P. v. Birelas CA6
Oct 5, 2022
We resolve this case by memorandum opinion under California Standards of Judicial Administration, Title 8, Standard 8.1. (See also People v. Garcia (2002) 97 Cal.App.4th 847, 853–855.) Defendant Moises Birelas was convicted of first degree murder in 2007. The jury found true a fe…
-
Rosa V. v. Ali H. CA6
Oct 5, 2022
Unfortunately, consideration of appellant’s appeal from the December 2019 order begins and ends with a discussion of the deficiencies in appellant’s briefs on appeal. Rule 8.204(a)(2), requires an appellant to “[s]tate the nature of the action, the relief sought in the trial cour…
-
Turman v. Parent CA4/3
Oct 5, 2022
Former restaurant employees initially filed this case in 2010 as a wage and hour class action against defendants Koji’s Japan Incorporated (Koji’s) and Arthur Parent, Jr., who had been Koji’s president, sole shareholder, and director. After over a decade of litigation which produ…
-
City of Fresno v. Pinedale County Water Dist. CA5
Oct 5, 2022
It is hereby ordered that the nonpublished opinion filed herein on June 10, 2022, be modified as follows: 1. At the end of the first sentence in the first full paragraph on page 31, after the sentence ending “in Civil Code section 1691,” add as footnote 10 the following footnote:…
-
P. v. Evans CA4/1
Oct 5, 2022
In 2017, Evans pleaded guilty to first-degree burglary. Thereafter, in accordance with the plea agreement, the trial court sentenced Evans to six years in prison but stayed the execution of the prison term pending successful completion of three years of formal probation. The tria…
-
Periman v. Superior Court CA3
Oct 5, 2022
A jury found defendant guilty of second degree murder in 2012, and he was sentenced to 15 years to life in prison plus one year for a vicarious arming enhancement. The Honorable Richard M. Mallett presided at defendant’s trial. This court affirmed defendant’s conviction and sente…
-
P. v. Rice CA3
Oct 5, 2022
In February 2020, the trial court found defendant violated probation and mandatory supervision in connection with two prior felonies—forcible assault in 2016 (Pen. Code, § 245, subd. (a)(4); statutory section citations that follow are to the Penal Code) and possession of a contro…
-
Nap Holdings v. China Electronics CA2/8
Oct 5, 2022
On May 28, 2021, plaintiff filed this action against defendant seeking a declaratory judgment on the question of whether an agreement, bearing the signatures of both parties and an effective date of December 18, 2018, was an enforceable written contract. Plaintiff alleged there h…
-
In re R.T. CA2/8
Oct 5, 2022
These proceedings commenced in 2019 after police found one-month-old A.B. and two-year-old R.T. in the care of an unrelated probationer in a hotel room where narcotics were easily accessible to the Children. The police notified DCFS. Later that evening, Mother told a child social…
-
Ewart v. County of Los Angeles CA2/7
Oct 5, 2022
Following Galloway’s assignment of rights to Ewart, Ewart, as Galloway’s assignee, sued the County, alleging a single claim of “implied indemnity.” Ewart alleged Galloway, acting as a volunteer traffic officer on the day of the accident, was an agent of the County and entitled to…
-
Cassilly v. City of L.A. CA2/8
Oct 5, 2022
Mr. Cassilly is the managing member of Linden Living Project, the owner of real property on Linden Avenue in Venice. In 2015, he filed an application with defendant City of Los Angeles for a coastal development permit to demolish and rebuild the single-family home on his property…