California Case Summaries: Monthly. April 1 to April 5, 2019

California Case Summaries™:


In the video above I discuss the 12 new civil cases published by the California Supreme Court and the Courts of Appeal between April 1 and April 5, 2019. Below is a free summary of one of the cases published last week.

Last month California courts published 57 new civil and family law cases. My online publication California Case Summaries™ provides monthly, quarterly and annual issues with short summaries, organized by legal topic, that help lawyers look smart and save time while keeping up with the new case law in their practice areas. Each issue offers both a single-user rate and discounted multi-user rates for law firms. For more information, or to subscribe today, click here.  

Mediation, Arbitration and Referee Services:
When you need an experienced and capable mediator, arbitrator or referee who knows the law, I can help you at ADR Services, Inc. To schedule a matter with me, please contact my case manager at ADR Services, Christopher Schuster, (619) 233-1323 or email christopher@adrservices.com.

Do well and be well™.

Best regards,
Monty A. McIntyre, Esq.
Mediator, Arbitrator and Referee at ADR Services, Inc.
Publisher of California Case Summaries™
California Trial Lawyer Since 1980
Member of ABOTA Since 1995
Past President of the SDCBA and the San Diego Chapter of ABOTA

 

 

California Case Summaries
Look Smart – Save Time™
Free | Monthly | Quarterly | Annual 

CALIFORNIA COURTS OF APPEAL 

 Civil Procedure

Workman v. Colichman (2019) _ Cal.App.5th _ , 2019 WL 1466957: The Court of Appeal affirmed the trial court’s order denying defendants’ anti-SLAPP motion to strike (Code of Civil Procedure section 425.16) in a complaint by a property owner against her neighbors alleging that the neighbors caused a sale to fall through by sending an email to the owner’s real estate agent claiming that defendants planned to make changes to their property that would destroy the view from plaintiff’s property. The trial court properly ruled that defendants failed to demonstrate that their actions were connected to a public issue. Information about the views from a private residence affecting only those directly interested in buying or selling that house is not an issue of public interest. (C.A. 2nd, April 3, 2019.)

Copyright © 2019 Monty A. McIntyre, Esq.
All Rights Reserved

Leave A Response

* Denotes Required Field