The 2015 edition of the California Litigation Review hit my mailbox yesterday. It is published by the Litigation Section of the California State Bar and it has some terrific coverage of appeals and writs developments last year . . . and I don’t say that just because the vast majority of the cases examined in it were covered here as they happened, including:
Jameson v. Desta (2015) 24 Cal.App.4th 491 (indigent plaintiff with fee waiver unable to afford court reporter still held limited in appellate argument by absence of transcript);
Hewlett-Packard Co. v. Oracle Corp. (2015) 239 Cal.App.4th 1174 (in which the court offered some friendly advice to the legislature for modification of California’s anti-SLAPP statute);
Ellis v. Ellis (2105) 235 Cal.App.4th 837 (Court of Appeal’s summary denial of motion to dismiss does not preclude granting the motion at the merits stage);
Ironridge Global IV, Ltd. v. ScripsAmerica, Inc. (2015) 238 Cal.App.4th 259 (explaining and reaffirming the disentitlement doctrine, under which disobedience of the order appealed from can result in dismissal of the appeal);
McKenzie v. Ford Motor Co. (2015) 238 Cal.App.4th 695 (how a trial court’s explicit reasoning can undermine presumptions inherent in the deferential “abuse of discretion” standard of review);
Lanquist v. Ventura County Employees’ Retirement Assn. (2015) 235 Cal.App.4th 186 (exercising heightened review of an administrative agency’s construction of statute);
Bermudez v. Chiolek (2015) 237 Cal.App.4th 1311 (judicial notice of laws of physics cannot be basis for arguing new theory of accident on appeal);
In re Christopher B. (2015) 240 Cal.App.4th 809 (trial court cannot “clarify” a mistaken dismissal to reinstate some charges);
AP-Colton, LLC v. Ohaeri (2015) 240 Cal.App.4th 500 (failure to pay fee to reclassify case from limited to unlimited did not cap damages amount to maximum awardable in an unlimited case);
Marriage of Oliverez (2015) 238 Cal.App.4th 1242 (limits on superior court judge’s power to reconsider rulings of another superior court judge);
People v. Scarbrough (2015) 240 Cal.App.4th 916 (trial court lacks jurisdiction to recall and reduce sentences under Proposition 47 when the judgment for those crimes is on appeal);
Martinez v. State of California Dept. of Transportation (2015) 238 Cal.App.4th 559 (trial court abused discretion in denying mistrial where counsel repeatedly violated orders on motions in limine);
Shiffer v. CBS Corporation (2015) 240 Cal.App.4th 246 (new theory developed by expert witness does not merit new trial where evidence upon which theory is based was previously in party’s possession).
Unfortunately, the Review appears to be available online only to members of the Litigation Section of the California State Bar. If you are a litigator who is not a member, find a friend with a copy of the Review and browse it. Besides articles on appellate issues, there are articles on alternative dispute resolution, class actions, employment law, etc. It is a great resource for catching up on developments you may have missed.
UPDATE: I should have given credit for the great year-end write-up on Appeals and Writs not just to the review generally, but to the two lawyers who authored it: Ben Feuer (who graciously thanked me for the post even though I had not mentioned him by name) and Anna-Rose Mathieson of Appellate Law Group LLP. Thanks, guys!