A home lender can be sued for fraud based on its alleged failure to clearly disclose the negative consequences when only the scheduled monthly payments are made on an adjustable rate mortgage loan, the has ruled in reversing a dismissal. The plaintiff obtained an option adjustable rate mortgage (ARM) loan from the defendant. He sued for fraud under state law, alleging that loan documents failed to adequately disclose that "negative amortization" occurred when he only made his monthly payments in accordance with the schedule provided by the defendant.
An employment discrimination plaintiff can introduce evidence of harassment directed at other employees even though the activity happened outside the plaintiff's presence and not while the plaintiff was employed at the company, the has ruled in reversing a jury verdict for the employer. The plaintiff, a Latino American, worked at a law firm where she alleged the owner called her a "bitch" and other profanities on a regular basis, touched and slapped her buttocks, touched her leg while offering her $200, asked for a shoulder massage and referred to his employees as "my Mexicans." She was ultimately fired after the attorney called her a "stupid bitch.
A Time Warner customer lacked standing to challenge a search warrant for the disclosure of his Internet service subscriber data, the has ruled in affirming a conviction. Police obtained a warrant requiring Time Warner to identify a suspected computer hacker through his Internet Protocol (IP) number. The subscriber information provided by Time Warner led police to the defendant.
A suit brought by court reporters against lawyers who protested court reporting fees on behalf of their clients is not barred under the state anti-SLAPP statute, the California Court of Appeal has ruled. The court reporters sued two attorneys for breach of contract for failing to pay more than $30,000 in fees. The attorneys, who had previously protested the court reporters' fees as excessive on behalf of their clients, moved to strike the complaint under the state anti-SLAPP statute. They claimed that the court reporters had no contractual relationship with them and sued them in retaliation for their protests.
The husband of a personal injury plaintiff could seek damages for loss of consortium - even though the woman was severely disabled before her accident, the has ruled in reversing judgment. The plaintiff is confined to a wheelchair as a result of being stricken by polio in 1952, a year after her marriage. She requires a lift system manufactured by the defendant to transfer her from the bedroom to the bathroom.
A gay man may be able to sue the sister of his deceased life partner for intentionally interfering with his expected inheritance, the California Court of Appeal has ruled in reversing a dismissal. The plaintiff was in a committed relationship with another man for over ten years. The plaintiff's life partner allegedly created a will on his computer that left the plaintiff one-half of the partner's $1 million estate.
The child of a mother in a same-sex marriage had three presumed parents under state dependency law, the has ruled. The mother married another woman when same-sex marriage was legal in the state. A child born during the marriage was conceived as the result of a premarital relationship between the mother and father.
A municipality may be liable for injuries suffered by a visitor to a local park who was struck by a drunk driver travelling along an adjacent public road, the California Court of Appeal has ruled in reversing a summary judgment. The plaintiff drove to a city park to watch a baseball game. She parked her car on a gravel strip that ran along a public road that bordered the park. The plaintiff returned to her car after the game. While standing behind her parked car, the plaintiff was struck by a drunk driver who had entered the graveled area, allegedly for the purpose of avoiding stalled traffic on the roadway.
A slip-and-fall plaintiff was not required to show that a store had notice of a dangerous substance on its floor when the accident occurred in an area normally reserved for store employees, the California Court of Appeal has ruled in reversing a summary judgment. The plaintiff worked as an independent contractor cleaning jewelry at the defendant's jewelry story. The plaintiff sued the store for negligence and premises liability when he suffered injuries in a fall at the store. He alleged that he slipped on jewelry cleaning solution that someone - presumably a store employee - had spilled on the floor of the store's employee break room.
A wrongful death lawsuit arising from a police shooting is not barred by the conviction of the victim's companion at the time for assault on an officer, the California Court of Appeal has ruled in reversing a dismissal. Under the U.S. Supreme Court's decision in Heck v. Humphrey (512 U.S. 477), a [section]1983 suit must be dismissed if a judgment in favor of the plaintiff would necessarily imply the invalidity of the plaintiff's underlying conviction. California courts have adopted a similar rule regarding analogous state civil rights suits.
ver las páginas en versión mobile | web
ver las páginas en versión mobile | web
© Copyright 2012, vLex. All Rights Reserved.
Contents in vLex United States
Explore vLex
For Professionals
For Partners
Company
Other interesting searches:
Justin Bolli | Interplanetary Society | diet | serment jeu de paume | Lowndes County School District | chirurgie cardiaque | modelos recursos amparo | Retrait recours hiérarchique | adesione accertamento
