A mass tort litigation over environmental contamination beneath a housing track settled, and the court was called upon to address whether a government-ordered environmental cleanup was part of the settlement consideration, and whether a good faith settlement could be approved without an individualized allocation of the settlement proceeds among the numerous plaintiffs and between their economic and noneconomic damages.
Jury Should Have Been Told Of Pretrial Settlement.
Plaintiff was injured in a car accident and sued alleging the drivers and owners of two other vehicles were at fault. One of the defendants settled with plaintiff, but a provision in the settlement required that defendant appear and participate as a party defendant at trial. A jury found the other defendant 60 percent liable […]
Structured Settlement Protection Act Applied.
The trial court approved transfer of structured settlement payments to a factoring company and ordered the payor insurance company to send the funds directly to the factor, and the insurance company appealed. The Structured Settlement Protection Act [SSPA; Insurance Code section 10134 et seq.] was passed to protect structured settlement payees from exploitation by factoring […]
Law Firm Of Attorney Who Volunteered To Conduct A Settlement Conference & Received Confidential Information Cannot Later Represent A Party To The Action.
An attorney served as a settlement officer in a mandatory settlement conference conducted by a judge and two volunteer attorneys in a case which did not settle. Later, the law firm of the attorney substituted in to represent the defendant in the same action. The trial court denied a motion to disqualify the law firm. […]
Summary Judgment, Granted To Defendant Based On A Broad Release In An Underlying Action To Which Defendant Is A Stranger, Reversed.
The underlying case involved allegations of breach of contract regarding intellectual property. After protracted litigation, there was a settlement agreement; the agreement included a broad release clause, which stated in part: “. . . do hereby irrevocably and unconditionally release and forever discharge each other and each of their respective past, present, and future affiliates, […]
Posttrial Award Of Expert Fees Under Civ.Proc. § 998.
Prior to trial, and pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 998, plaintiff offered to allow judgment to be entered in its favor and against defendant for $665,818. Defendant did not respond to the offer and plaintiff recovered $945,947 at trial. Defendant argued on appeal that the award of expert witness fees by the trial court […]
Lemon Law Case.
The purchaser of a luxury automobile which had numerous problems eventually brought a lemon law action [Song-Beverly Consumer Warranty Act; Civil Code section 1790, et seq]. The car manufacturer served the consumer with an offer to compromise under California Code of Civil Procedure section 998, which stated: “Pursuant to California Civil Code section 1793.2(d)(2), MBUSA […]
Printed Name At The Bottom Of Several E-mails Not Enough To Show There Was A Settlement.
Plaintiffs filed a motion pursuant of Code of Civil Procedure section 664.6, to enforce a settlement. In concluding there was a settlement, the trial court found e-mails coupled with a voice mail qualified as an electronic signature under the Uniform Electronic Transactions Act [Civil Code section 1633.1, et seq.; UETA]. The Court of Appeal reversed, […]
Printed Name At The Bottom Of An Email Not Enough To Show There Was A Settlement.
Plaintiffs filed a motion pursuant of Code of Civil Procedure section 664.6, to enforce a settlement. In concluding there was a settlement, the trial court found e-mails couple with a voice mail qualified as an electronic signature under the Uniform Electronic Transactions Act [Civil Code section 1633.1, et seq.; UETA]. The Court of Appeal reversed, […]
Clear Sailing Attorneys’ Fees Provision In Class Action Settlement Upheld.
After the trial court approved a class action settlement, overruling the objections of a member of the class, the class member appealed. The class member argued the notice to the class members denied them due process because the nature and timing of the settlement approval procedure set forth in the notice was unfair, and because […]
- 1
- 2
- 3
- …
- 5
- Next Page »