Current Legal News

Case Summaries

Bankruptcy Law

[12/02] Trusted Net Media v. The Morrison Agency
In a bankruptcy case, decision affirming bankruptcy court's denial plaintiff's motion to dismiss is affirmed where: 1) 11 U.S.C. section 303(b) did not implicate subject matter jurisdiction; and thus 2) plaintiff's objection to the involuntary petition on grounds of non-compliance with section 303(b) was waived.

[11/24] Spencer v. Marshall
In a Chapter 13 bankruptcy matter, decision finding defendant was an equity purchaser and plaintiff was an equity seller and therefore the transaction came under the protection of the Home Equity Sales Contract Act (HESCA) is affirmed over claims of error that: 1) plaintiff's sale of property to individual as his assignee was outside the scope of HESCA; and 2) the sale fell under the exceptions to an equity purchaser set forth in section 1695.1 subdivisions (a)(4) and (a)(5).

[11/24] LPP Mortgage, Ltd. v. Brinley
In a bankruptcy matter, court order allowing trustee to revoke his abandonment of defendants' real property is affirmed where: 1) the trustee was entitled to relief under Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b)(5) and (6) "based on principles of equity, and the windfall to the debtors and the junior lienholders [if the abandonment were not revoked]; and 2) the bankruptcy court did not abuse its discretion in determining that the equities weighed in favor of revoking the abandonment.

More...

Criminal Law & Procedure

[12/04] Valencia v. Mukasey
Petition for review of a BIA decision affirming petitioner's order of removal on the basis of a 1984 California conviction for transporting heroin is denied where there is no requirement that an alien be advised of the availability of relief from deportation where there is no apparent eligibility to receive it.

[12/03] US v. Wayland
Sentence for making false statements relating to health care matters is affirmed over defendant's objection that fraudulently registering a post office box and checking account, as well as filing false tax returns, to further the scheme were not "sophisticated means" for purposes of a sentence enhancement.

[12/03] Boim v. Holy Land Found. for Relief and Dev.
In a suit arising from the murder of an American in Israel, alleging that defendants, three organizations and one individual, had provided financial support to Hamas, whose gunmen allegedly committed the murder, and that plaintiffs were entitled to recover against defendants under 18 U.S.C. section 2333(a), judgments against all defendants, and award of treble damages, are affirmed in part and reversed in part by the court sitting en banc where: 1) section 2333 does create tort liability for the financial supporters of terrorist groups targeting Americans outside the U.S.; 2) two of the defendant organizations had not contradicted plaintiffs' evidence on the only material fact at issue, namely that Hamas was responsible for the murder, and were properly held liable under section 2333; but 3) with respect to the third defendant organization, collateral estoppel effect could not be given to a prior order freezing defendant's funds, and remand was necessary for a new determination of whether defendant was knowingly supporting terrorism; and 4) the individual defendant had not rendered material support to Hamas subsequent to the passage of a related criminal statute upon which the tort liability was based, and was not subject to liability.

More...

Family Law

[12/02] County of Sacramento v. Llanes
Denial of defendant's motion to set aside a judgment of paternity as untimely is affirmed over claims of error that: 1) defendant's motion was timely; 2) plaintiff-county should have been estopped from asserting the motion was untimely because the California Department of Child Support Services (CDCSS) posted letters on its website stating that previously established fathers, such as defendant, had until December 31, 2006 to file a motion to set aside judgment of paternity; and 3) defendant relied on those letters in filing his motion on December 29, 2006.

[11/25] Tebo v. Tebo
In a suit alleging a civil conspiracy to have plaintiff involuntarily committed for mental treatment, summary judgment for defendants is affirmed where: 1) plaintiff did not produce evidence to show a agreement between the private and public defendants; 2) there was no factual dispute on the elements of a malicious-prosecution claim; 3) there was no basis for a per se negligence action against defendants-stepsons; 4) no material facts were in dispute as to whether defendants-doctors deprived plaintiff of due-process rights; 5) intentional infliction of emotional distress and malicious prosecution claims against defendants-doctors were not supported by evidence; and 6) defendants-doctors were entitled to immunity on negligence claims.

[11/25] In re I.I.
Order terminating mother's parental rights to her children under Welfare and Institutions Code section 366.26 is affirmed over claims of error that the juvenile court's finding that the children were adoptable was not supported by substantial evidence because: 1) there was no evidence of any other approved homes that were willing to take the children or children with their characteristics; 2) the children had severe behavioral problems; and 3) the children were part of a large sibling set.

More...