Press "Enter" to skip to content

Posts tagged as “California”

Calif. App. Court (5th Dist) Holds Lender’s Action to Remove Prior Lien Was Time-Barred

The Court of Appeal of the State of California, Fifth District, recently held a trial court incorrectly applied the statute of limitations on an alleged quiet title claim, where the statute of limitations to foreclose a first deed of trust had already run, and the lien had been extinguished, prior to the filing of the alleged quiet title claim.

California Enacts HIPAA-Conforming Amendments to CCPA; Extends B2B and Employment Exemptions  

Assembly Bill 713 was approved by California Gov. Gavin Newsom on Sept. 25, 2020, at which time its provisions went into effect.  The legislation amends the California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA) in part by addressing certain issues related to de-identified patient information.

Calif. App. Court (4th Dist) Rules Arbitration Clause Invalid Due to Prohibition on Injunctive Relief

The Court of Appeals of the State of California, Fourth Appellate District, recently held that an arbitration provision contained in a credit card agreement was unenforceable because it sought to bar a customer from pursuing “in any forum” his claim for a public injunction.

Calif. App. Court (1st Dist) Refuses to Enforce Predispute Jury Waiver Despite Forum Selection Clause

The Court of Appeal of the State of California, First Appellate District, recently held that a forum selection clause in favor of a New York forum was unenforceable where the clause included a predispute jury trial waiver, which is unenforceable under California law but which would have been enforceable under New York law. Accordingly, the Appellate Court reversed the order of dismissal entered by the trial court. A copy of the opinion in Handoush v. Lease Finance Group, LLC is available at:  Link to Opinion. The plaintiff storeowner filed a lawsuit against the defendant company alleging that the defendant supposedly defrauded…

Calif. App. Court (2nd Dist) Upholds Over 60% Reduction on Consumer Plaintiff’s Attorney Fee Award

The Court of Appeals of California, Second District, recently upheld a trial court’s ruling reducing the amount of a plaintiff’s attorney’s fee award in a consumer litigation action to less than 40% of the amount sought by the plaintiff’s counsel. A copy of the opinion in Morris v. Hyundai Motor America is available at:  Link to Opinion.  The opinion was later revised slightly and certified for publication:  Link to Opinion. A car buyer sued the manufacturer of a used car she purchased under California’s Song-Beverly Consumer Warranty Act, Civ. Code, § 1790 et seq., for alleged defects that the manufacturer refused to…

Three New California Laws Will Impact Consumer Credit

Three new laws signed by California Gov. Gavin Newsom in recent days will impact consumer credit in the state by capping interest rates on payday and other consumer installment loans, giving automatic exemptions for bank account levies and removing exemptions for attorneys and mortgage loans from the Rosenthal Act. California Financing Law Expanded AB 539 amends the California Financing Law, which licenses and regulates finance lenders and brokers, by imposing new restrictions on loans of $2,500 or more but less than $10,000. It also adds a rate cap on those loans so that the annual simple interest rate may not…

Calif. App. Court (2nd Dist) Upholds Denial of Class Cert Based on Survey and Statistical Sampling

The Court of Appeal for the Second District of California affirmed an order denying class certification in a wage and hour litigation, holding that the plaintiffs’ proposed anonymous, double-blind survey and statistical sampling failed to address individualized issues for liability and damages. In so ruling, the Appellate Court held that the plaintiffs’ trial plan was unmanageable and unfair because, among other things, the proposed survey deprived the defendants of the ability to cross-examine the witnesses and to assert defenses.  A copy of the opinion in McCleery v. Allstate Insurance Company is available at:  Link to Opinion. In this putative class…

Calif. App. Court (2nd Dist) Holds No Duty of Care Owed in Loan Mod Negotiations

Disagreeing with contrary rulings from the First and Sixth Districts, the California Court of Appeal for the Second District recently affirmed a trial court’s ruling that no duty of care is owed to a borrower during contract negotiations for a mortgage loan modification. A copy of the opinion in Sheen v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. is available at:  Link to Opinion. In 1998, the plaintiff borrower obtained a $500,000 loan secured by a deed of trust (the “first loan”).  The first loan is not at issue.  In 2005, the borrower obtained two junior loans from the defendant bank in the amounts $167,820 (the…