California Case Summaries

2nd District Court of Appeal, Civil Procedure, Litigation

Clapkin v. Levin — Anti-SLAPP motion fails where claims arise from underlying business dispute, not protected litigation activity; orders denying related fee motions are not appealable

Second District affirms denial of an anti-SLAPP motion in a family corporation dispute and reaffirms that orders denying related attorney fee motions are not separately appealable, deepening a split with other appellate divisions.

2nd District Court of Appeal, Healthcare Law, Litigation

Pomona Valley Hospital v. Kaiser Foundation Health Plan — Expired contract rates are admissible in quantum meruit dispute over emergency room reimbursement; prejudgment interest capped at 7 percent

Second District holds that a hospital's expired 2004 contract with Kaiser was admissible in a quantum meruit dispute over emergency reimbursement and that prejudgment interest in such actions is 7 percent, not 10 percent.

1st District Court of Appeal, Labor & Employment Law, Litigation

Ehrenkranz v. San Francisco Zen Center — Ministerial exception requires actual ecclesiastical concern; Labor Code bond requirement applies only to employer entities

First District holds the First Amendment ministerial exception does not categorically bar a Zen Center worker's wage-and-hour claims, but Labor Code section 98.2's appeal bond is required only of the employing entity, not individuals also liable under section 558.1.

2nd District Court of Appeal, Administrative Law, Constitutional Law

Fix the City v. City of Los Angeles — Mayor Bass’s Local Housing/Homelessness Emergency Declaration Was Authorized by City Code and Not Preempted by State Emergency Services Act

Second District affirms denial of a writ challenge to Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass's 2023 housing-and-homelessness emergency declaration, holding section 8.33 of the Los Angeles Administrative Code is not preempted by the California Emergency Services Act.

2nd District Court of Appeal, Civil Procedure, Litigation

Woodhouse v. State Bar of California — Vexatious-Litigant Determination Affirmed; Future Pro Per Filings Require Pre-Filing Approval and Security

Second District affirms a trial-court ruling declaring an inactive California attorney a vexatious litigant and barring his future pro per suits absent pre-filing approval and posted security, in light of a long history of dismissed federal cases and frivolous filings.

Scroll to Top