Case Summaries

Contracts

[07/23] Cox v. Ocean View Hotel Corp.
In an employment discrimination case involving an employment agreement containing a mandatory arbitration clause, denial of defendant-employer's motion to compel arbitration and partial summary judgment for plaintiff is reversed where: 1) for purposes of a breach-of-agreement theory, plaintiff did not properly initiate arbitration under the terms of his employment agreement via a letter he sent; and 2) the district court improperly granted summary judgment in plaintiff's favor on the issue of waiver.

[07/23] Magallanes v. Ill. Bell Tel. Co.
Dismissal of an employment-discrimination suit because the parties had settled is reversed where defendant-employer did not meet its burden to prove that plaintiff's attorney had in fact been authorized to enter into a settlement agreement.

[07/22] US v. De La Mata
In a case where the government obtained defendants' promises to convey certain interests in property to the United States, in lieu of a forfeiture trial and sentence, an order granting the government's motion for a "final order of forfeiture" is affirmed in part and vacated in part where: 1) individual defendants and corporate defendants were properly before the court of appeals; 2) the circuit court rejects individual defendants' argument that the district court lacked subject matter jurisdiction because the government's motion sought relief in a criminal case via amended sentences; but 3) corporate defendants were not parties to individual defendants' agreements and thus retained certain property interests.

More...

Public Utilities

[07/22] California Dep't of Water Res. v. Powerex Corp.
In a case arising out of the 2000-2001 California energy crisis, an order remanding the case to state court is reversed and remanded where: 1) review of a district court's decision to decline an exercise of supplemental jurisdiction is not barred by 28 U.S.C. section 1447(d); 2) in light of certain Supreme Court precedent, there is jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. section 1291 to review the remand order; and 3) defendant, a Canadian corporation that markets and distributes electric power, is an organ of British Columbia, and thus falls within the definition of "foreign state" under the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act and is entitled to a federal bench trial.

[07/22] Pac. Gas & Elec. Co. v. Fed. Energy Regulatory Comm'n
Petition for review of FERC orders requiring the California Independent System Operator, rather than Participating Transmission Owners like petitioner, to conduct interconnection studies is denied where petitioner had sufficient notice of the requirement based on the issuance of earlier FERC orders in 2003 and 2004, and failed to timely object.

[07/21] CleanCOALition v. TXU Power
In a citizen suit under the Clean Air Act (CAA) seeking to prevent power-plant construction, dismissal for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction is affirmed where the statute does not authorize federal court jurisdiction: 1) to redress alleged pre-permit, pre-construction, pre-operation CAA violations; or 2) in pre-construction citizen suits against facilities that have either obtained a permit or are in the process of doing so, as opposed to entities proposing to construct a facility without a permit whatsoever.

More...

Dispute Resolution & Arbitration

[07/23] Cox v. Ocean View Hotel Corp.
In an employment discrimination case involving an employment agreement containing a mandatory arbitration clause, denial of defendant-employer's motion to compel arbitration and partial summary judgment for plaintiff is reversed where: 1) for purposes of a breach-of-agreement theory, plaintiff did not properly initiate arbitration under the terms of his employment agreement via a letter he sent; and 2) the district court improperly granted summary judgment in plaintiff's favor on the issue of waiver.

[07/21] Simmons v. Ghaderi
In a breach of contract action arising from a medical malpractice suit, wherein plaintiffs sought to enforce an oral settlement agreement allegedly formed during mediation, a ruling upholding a decision to admit evidence relating to the mediation proceedings is reversed where: 1) the court of appeal improperly relied on the doctrine of estoppel to create a judicial exception to the comprehensive statutory scheme of mediation confidentiality; and 2) the evidence relating to the mediation proceedings should not have been admitted at trial.

[07/18] Salmon Run Shopping Ctr. LLC v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
An NLRB order requiring a shopping mall operator to allow a union to distribute literature on mall premises is vacated where the mall operator did not improperly discriminate against the union under section 7 of the National Labor Relations Act.

More...

Patent

[07/21] Eisai Co. Ltd. v. Dr. Reddy's Lab., Ltd.
In a patent case involving a class of drugs known as proton pump inhibitors, summary judgment for plaintiff ruling that its patent was enforceable is affirmed where defendants failed to present sufficient evidence to establish that: 1) the patent in dispute was invalid for obviousness; or 2) plaintiffs had engaged in inequitable conduct by attempting to deceive the Patent Office.

[07/16] Serdarevic v. Advanced Med. Optics, Inc.
In a suit seeking correction of inventorship and raising state law claims for unjust enrichment and fraud, summary judgment for defendants is affirmed where: 1) the presumption of laches applied since plaintiff delayed more than six years after she knew of the issuance of the patents; 2) plaintiff failed to rebut the presumption of laches; 3) plaintiff failed to identify conduct that gave rise to an unclean hands defense; 4) unjust enrichment claims failed as defendants had assigned the patents more than six years before plaintiff's complaint; 5) claims for fraud were time barred; and 6) there was no abuse of discretion in denying plaintiff's Rule 56(f) motion.

[07/15] Jang v. Boston Scientific Corp.
In a suit for breach of contract arising from defendants' failure to make payments for the sale of certain devices allegedly covered by patents, a consent judgment based on the district court's claim construction order is vacated and remanded where: 1) it was impossible to discern from the stipulated judgment which of the district court's claim construction rulings would actually affect the issue of infringement; and 2) the stipulated judgment did not provide any context with respect to how the disputed claim construction rulings related to the accused products.

More...

Communications Law

[07/21] CBS Corp. v. Fed. Communication Comm'n
FCC orders imposing monetary penalties on CBS for broadcasting indecent material during the Super Bowl halftime show in 2004 are vacated where: 1) the FCC's application of a new policy concerning penalties for fleeting broadcasts of indecent material, which went into effect one month after the broadcast, would raise due-process concerns; 2) the FCC acted arbitrarily and capriciously when, without notice, it changed its policy on the types of "fleeting or isolated" broadcast material that could result in the imposition of monetary sanctions to distinguish between fleeting words and fleeting images; 3) respondeat superior liability did not apply because the halftime show performers, Janet Jackson and Justin Timberlake, were independent contractors and not employees of CBS; 4) CBS's unique and non-delegable duty as a broadcast licensee to avoid the broadcast of indecent material does not expose it to liability where the government did not meet its constitutional obligation to prove that CBS acted with scienter; and 5) the government's determination that CBS "willfully" failed to take precautions against broadcast indecency did not meet constitutional requirements where CBS acted merely negligently, not recklessly.

[07/15] Big Sky Network Canada, Ltd. v. Sichuan Provincial Gov't
In a suit arising out of the dissolution of a telecommunications joint venture by mandate of the Chinese government and Chinese partner's failure to return an investment, dismissal of the case for lack of subject matter jurisdiction is affirmed where: 1) the district court did not abuse its discretion in granting defendants' request for an extension of time under section 1441(d) of the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act (FSIA); and 2) mere financial loss resulting from the failure to receive monies abroad does not constitute a direct effect within the meaning of the commercial activity exception to the FSIA.

[06/26] Peterson v. Cellco Partnership
Judgment dismissing plaintiffs' case with prejudice after the court sustained defendant's demurrers is affirmed where: 1) plaintiffs failed to allege sufficient facts to support their standing to bring an unfair competition claim; and 2) plaintiffs' unjust enrichment claim was based on alleged Insurance Code violations for which no private right of action exists, and plaintiffs received the benefit of the bargain.

More...

Oil & Gas

[07/18] WA Gas Light Co. v. Fed. Energy Regulatory Comm'n
Petition for review of an FERC decision to approve a project to expand the liquefied natural gas (LNG) capacity of an LNG terminal is granted where: 1) substantial evidence supported a determination that the threat of increased leakage was due to defects in the compression couplings in petitioner's system; and 2) substantial evidence did not support a conclusion that petitioner could address safety concerns before the project's in-service date.

[07/11] Rick-Mik Enters. Inc. v. Equilon Enters., LLC
In an action brought by franchisees, Shell and Texaco gasoline stations, alleging that defendant-franchisor violated antitrust laws by illegally tying two distinct products (the franchises and certain credit-card processing services), dismissal of antitrust and related state law counts from the complaint is affirmed where: 1) plaintiffs' complaint failed to allege market power in the relevant market; 2) in the alleged franchising context, credit card processing services are not a product distinct from the franchise itself; 3) price-fixing allegations were impermissibly vague; and 4) plaintiffs waived the opportunity to attempt to cure such deficiencies.

[07/02] Chicago Bridge & Iron Co. v. Fed. Trade Comm'n
In a republished opinion, a petition for review of an order of the FTC requiring petitioner to divest assets acquired from a Pennsylvania company since they would likely result in a substantial lessening of competition or tend to create a monopoly is denied where: 1) the FTC correctly applied the legal standards of burdens of proof and persuasion; 2) the FTC properly analyzed the "potential entry" defense and had substantial evidence to conclude that "potential entry" evidence was insufficient to rebut the prima facie case; 3) substantial evidence supported its factual findings; and 4) there was no abuse of discretion in the issuance of its remedy provisions. (Substituted opinion)

More...

Securities Law

[07/22] Bondi v. Capital & Fin. Asset Mgmt. S.A.
Denial of motion by debtor in foreign bankruptcy proceedings to enjoin actions brought against it in the United States is affirmed where the district court acted within its sound discretion in interpreting 11 U.S.C. section 304(c)'s instruction to assure an economical and expeditious administration of a foreign estate.

[07/01] Wood v. Baum
In a derivative action, dismissal of the case by the Court of Chancellery is affirmed where the plaintiff failed to allege particularized facts to show that a majority of the defendants knowingly engaged in fraudulent or illegal conduct or breached in bad faith the covenant of a good faith and fair dealing.

[05/30] Feldman v. Cutaia
In a suit challenging stock options issued to the defendants, dismissal of plaintiff's complaint for lack of standing is affirmed where: 1) the plaintiff ceased to be a stockholder following the company's merger; 2) plaintiff's claims are derivative since the injury alleged is properly regarded as injury to the company and not the class; and 3) plaintiff's attack on the validity of the stock options is derivative because it does not relate to the fairness of the merger itself.

More...

Administrative Law

[07/23] Singh v. Mukasey
The REAL ID Act of 2005 gives aliens whose removal order became final before the REAL ID Act a reasonable opportunity to obtain judicial review. Aliens whose petitions were rendered untimely by the Act had a grace period of no more than 30 days from the effective date of the Act in which to seek such review.

[07/23] Northwest Envtl. Advocates v. US Envtl. Prot. Agency
In an action challenging a regulation originally promulgated by the EPA in 1973 exempting certain marine discharges from the permitting scheme of sections 301(a) and 402 of the Clean Water Act (CWA), a decision vacating the regulation is affirmed where: 1) the district court had subject matter jurisdiction over the suit; 2) the EPA acted ultra vires in promulgating the regulation and its denial of plaintiffs' 1999 petition requesting a repeal of the regulation was not in accordance with law; and 3) the remedial order was a proper exercise of the district court's discretion.

[07/23] Huang v. Mukasey
Petitions for review of BIA's denials of several petitions to reopen removal proceedings are dismissed in part and denied in part where no reviewable questions of law were presented regarding: 1) whether petitioners would face persecution in China for violating its one-child policy; 2) denial of a petition based on petitioner's propensity to lie in prior removal proceedings; or 3) dismissal as untimely of a petition to reopen based on the ineffective assistance of counsel at prior proceedings.

More...

Family Law

[07/22] In re Esmeralda S.
Juvenile court's order terminating defendant-mother's parental rights to her child is affirmed over claims of error that: 1) defendant's due process rights were violated when the juvenile court appointed her a guardian ad litem; and 2) the juvenile court did not properly inquire into her and the minor's father's possible American Indian ancestry for purposes of complying with Indian Child Welfare Act.

[07/18] In re Brandon T.
Order terminating mother's parental rights over her child is affirmed where: 1) there was sufficient evidence that the minor was specifically adoptable by his relative caretakers; 2) the Indian Child Welfare Act does not require more than one expert at a section 366.26 hearing; 3) there was sufficient evidence that continued custody would result in serious emotional or physical harm to the minor; and 4) mother was not prejudiced by a lack of evidence in regard to prevailing social and cultural standards of the minor's tribe.

[06/30] Harper v. Division of Family Services
In a parental right adjudicatory proceeding, the court's decision to terminate respondent's parental rights and transfer of the minor to the Division of Family Services is affirmed where: 1) there was clear and convincing evidence to terminate parental rights; and 2) the state was able to prove that termination of parental rights was in the minor's best interest.

More...

Probate Trusts

[07/16] Perrin v. Lee
In a probate proceeding, denial of plaintiffs' section 21320 safe harbor petition for a determination that their proposed petition to invalidate two trust amendments would not be a contest within the meaning of a no contest clause in a trust is reversed where: 1) the trust did not explicitly state that a contest to an amendment would violate the no contest clause; and 2) the no contest clause was not incorporated by reference into the amendments.

[05/15] Miller v. Campbell
In a fees dispute brought by a law firm against the executor of an estate after the probate court refused to award a category of fees associated with services rendered for the executor's personal matters, grant of executor's motions in limine to exclude all evidence, resulting in dismissal of the case, is reversed where: 1) the doctrines of res judicata and collateral estoppel did not apply to bar the law firm's claim of fees against the executor personally; and 2) in light of the evidence, the trial court erroneously ruled that the evidence was insufficient, as a matter of law, to support the law firm's quantum meruit claim.

[05/13] Montegani v. Johnson
In a dispute over a decedent's estate involving revocable and irrevocable trusts, an order denying plaintiff's Probate Code section 21320 application based on her lack of standing for section 21320 relief is affirmed where, as part of its duty to oversee the administration of the estate and insure orderly administration of justice, the trial court properly concluded that plaintiff was no longer a beneficiary of the trusts at issue, and thus lacked standing to seek declaratory relief under section 21320.

More...

Immigration Law

[07/23] US v. Jimenez
A sentence for unlawful reentry of a deported alien is affirmed where defendant's prior convictions for Unlawful Use of a Communication Facility under 21 U.S.C. section 843(b) qualify as "drug trafficking offenses" under section 2L1.2(b)(1)(A)(i) of the Guidelines, as reasoned in US v. Orihuela, 320 F.3d 1302, 1305 (11th Cir. 2003).

[07/23] Singh v. Mukasey
The REAL ID Act of 2005 gives aliens whose removal order became final before the REAL ID Act a reasonable opportunity to obtain judicial review. Aliens whose petitions were rendered untimely by the Act had a grace period of no more than 30 days from the effective date of the Act in which to seek such review.

[07/23] Huang v. Mukasey
Petitions for review of BIA's denials of several petitions to reopen removal proceedings are dismissed in part and denied in part where no reviewable questions of law were presented regarding: 1) whether petitioners would face persecution in China for violating its one-child policy; 2) denial of a petition based on petitioner's propensity to lie in prior removal proceedings; or 3) dismissal as untimely of a petition to reopen based on the ineffective assistance of counsel at prior proceedings.

More...

Copyright

[07/11] Classic Media, Inc. v. Mewborn
In actions seeking declaratory relief as to the parties' respective copyright interests in works involving the famous children's story and novel, Lassie Come Home, the circuit court rules that the Copyright Act of 1976's termination of transfer right, 17 U.S.C. section 304(c), was not extinguished by a post-1978 re-grant of the very rights previously assigned before 1978.

[05/27] Mostly Memories, Inc. v. For Your Ease Only, Inc.
In a suit alleging copyright infringement and various state-law claims, denial of attorney's fees for defendants and sua sponte dismissal of their counter claims is reversed and remanded where: 1) the district court did not explain why it dismissed the counterclaims and its apparent rationale, a defect in jurisdiction or venue, was unsupported by the record; and 2) defendant was the prevailing party and was entitled to an award of attorney's fees under section 505 of the Copyright Act.

[05/14] Oravec v. Sunny Isles Luxury Ventures, L.C.
In an action brought by plaintiff-architect under the Copyright Act alleging that defendants infringed his copyrighted architectural designs via the design, development, and construction of certain Trump buildings, summary judgment for defendants, as well as a denial of a motion for leave to file a third amended complaint, are affirmed where a thorough review of the record indicated that the district court properly made its rulings under the specific facts of the case and did not abuse its discretion in denying the motion for leave to amend.

More...