Having prevailed on their appeal to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, "MGA parties" have now brought a counterclaim against Mattel in Case No. CV 04-9049 SGL (RNBx). The claims raised include: (1) Trade Secret Misappropriation, (2) Civil RICO, and (3) Wrongful Injunction.
|
Professional office (PO) providing tax payment services was delinquent by 2 days in making real property tax payments of $5.5 Million. The County refused to accept payment and imposed a 10% penalty under R&TC 4985.2. PO sued and trial court granted relief. Appellate court reversed holding (1) PO’s mailing the payment to the wrong address is not “reasonable cause and circumstances beyond the person’s control” under 4985.2(a), and (2) trial court does not have power to provide general equitable relief.
|
Where an attorney made series of mistakes, including failing to timely file suits on behalf of defendants causing the running of statute of limitations, and causing three orders to show cause why appeal should not be dismissed, the U.S. Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals issued $5,000 in monetary sanctions against the attorney and ordered him to serve copies of this opinion on his clients so they may consider bringing malpractice actions against him.
|
The U.S. District Court granted class certification in a lawsuit against American Honda, based on the conclusion that California law would have applied to all Honda transactions nationwide, and that all consumers had relied on certain Honda advertisement. The U.S. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals vacated class certification, saying these conclusions were incorrect.
|
Plaintiff filed a "whistle blower" (qui tam) action under the False Claims Act (FCA), claiming some hospitals were involved in insurance fraud. The United States intervened and obtained a large settlement, and paid a relator's fee to Plaintiff. Plaintiff accounted for fee as capital gain and paid tax on it. The U.S. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals held: qui tam award under the FCA was ordinary income.
|
Police officers used a TASER "stun gun" to subdue a resistant suspect before placing him in handcuffs. After arrest, suspect's heart went into irregular beating and he passed away. Suspect's estate sued TASER for failing to provide sufficient warning of the dangers of the stun gun. District court entered summary judgment in favor of defendant. The U.S. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals held: under California law, a manufacturer is not under a duty to warn of “every report of a possible risk, no matter how speculative,
conjectural, or tentative.” Judgment affirmed.
|
In this case, the United States Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals held: A corporation whose sole shareholder is a custodial Roth Individual Retirement Account (Roth IRA) is ineligible to make a Subpchapter "S" Election under Section 1361 of the Internal Revenue Code.
|
This useful guide, published by California Department of Consumer Affairs ("DCA"), summarizes California law on the rights and responsibilities of residential tenants and residential landlords, including references to relevant discrimination laws. For further information visit http://www.dca.ca.gov.
|
This is a Model Stock Purchase Agreement Adopted by the Committee on Negotiated Acquisitions, Section of Business Law, Amercan Bar Association (ABA). As the document notes on its first page, the document is buyer-oriented.
|
Employees sued their employer's accounting firm for issuing W-2 forms that over-stated the employees' income. This California Court held that CPAs did not owe a duty of care to client's employees, because there was no privity of contract between CPAs and client's employees, there are no allegations that CPAs generated the inflated numbers, or that CPAs were employed to verify that the accounting information was correct.
|