CA Unpub Decisions

Lawsuit to establish a right-of-way across property owned by defendants. In challenging the trial court's decision, Appellant claims that he had established the existence of an easement through at least one of the theories set forth in complaint including an easement by conveyance, an easement by adverse possession. An easement by implication and an easement by necessity. Appellant also claims that the court erred in failing to balance the hardships in his favor. Court affirms the judgment.

After a marriage of 12 years, husband claimed, not responsible for spousal support on the ground that marriage was invalid because of wife's prior existing marriage. The trial court, however, found that Appellant was estopped from challenging the validity of marriage.

This appeal involves the construction of a now-completed Wal-Mart Supercenter in Beaumont. The Wal-Mart includes a major retail store, a gas station, a pharmacy and other retail and commercial space on about 23 acres. Plaintiff's primary objection to the underlying CEQA approval was the alleged failure of the City of Beaumont properly to analyze and mitigate three areas of environmental impact: traffic, air quality, and noise, as well as project alternatives.Court hold the EIR and the CEQA findings are supported by substantial evidence. Court affirms the judgment

This appeal involves the construction of a Wal-Mart Supercenter, now almost completed, in San Jacinto. The planned Wal-Mart includes a major retail store, a gas station, a drive-through pharmacy, three restaurants and other retail space. Plaintiff's primary objection to the underlying CEQA approval was the failure of the City Council of San Jacinto to analyze and mitigate the loss of prime agricultural land and the potential blighting impacts of the project.Court affirms the judgment

A criminal law decision regarding second degree murder with a firearm enhancement.

A client failed to pay her lawyer as agreed. Attorney sought to withdraw from the representation and appellant opposed the motion. The trial court therefore denied the motion, requiring Attorney to continue representing appellant despite their dispute over fees. Attorney brought the instant suit against appellant for fees, while continuing to zealously represent appellant in the underlying litigation. This case was tried after the underlying litigation was completed.

A decision regarding professional negligence based on, among other things, Respondent's alleged failure to meet the standard of care in preparing the opposition to the motion for summary judgment. Based on its finding that the Court of Appeal's reversal of the judgment established that Respondent met the standard of care in preparing the opposition, the trial court precluded evidence on that issue. The matter then proceeded to a jury trial and the jury found in Respondent's favor.

A decision regarding committing a lewd act upon a child. The trial court placed Appellant on formal probation and ordered to pay, inter alia, a $200 restitution fine. Thereafter, the trial court found appellant had violated multiple conditions of his probation. The court revoked probation, sentenced appellant to the mid-term of 6 years, and imposed an additional $200 restitution fine. Hence this appeal.

A ward of the juvenile court appeals from the order committing him to the California Youth Authority (CYA) following Appellant's admission that he possessed methamphetamine, a controlled substance.

Appellant appeals from the judgment of conviction for one count of assault with a knife by means likely to produce great bodily injury, contending that the trial court abused its discretion in refusing to dismiss a juror, in excluding certain evidence and in restricting his cross-examination of a witness. Court affirm the judgment of conviction.

Appellant appeals from an order that he pay one-half of the capital gains tax resulting from the sale of a community asset associated with the dissolution of his marriage to respondent. Appellant contends he should only pay a percentage of the tax obligation equal to the percentage of the proceeds he realized from the total resulting from the sale of the taxed asset. Court affirm.

This is a boundary dispute between neighbors.The parties offered conflicting expert testimony on which of two surveys the trial court should use in resolving the dispute. Court conclude that the determination is one of fact and that the trial court's finding in favor of respondent is supported by substantial evidence. Court affirm.

Appellant was convicted of first-degree murder in the shooting death of his wife.

A decision rearding inflicting corporal injury on a cohabitant and a prior prison term enhancement.