76 California opinions name it 4 courts 1900–2025 4 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by California courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Wershba v. Apple Computer, Inc.green2 sentences2023Third, although the moving parties have the burden to show that a proposed settlement is fair and reasonable, “in the final analysis it is the court that bears the responsibility to ensure that the recovery represents a reasonable compromise . . . .” (Kullar, supra, 168 Cal.App.4th at p. 129 .) While the trial court should not give a 12 rubber-stamp approval, the settlement hearing also should not be turned into a trial or rehearsal for trial on the merits. (7-Eleven, supra, 85 Cal.App.4th at p. 1145 ; accord, Wershba, supra, 91 Cal.App.4th at p. 246 .) “ ‘Neither the trial court nor this cour 2023Third, although the moving parties have the burden to show that a proposed settlement is fair and reasonable, “in the final analysis it is the court that bears the responsibility to ensure that the recovery represents a reasonable compromise . . . .” (Kullar, supra, 168 Cal.App.4th at p. 129 .) While the trial court should not give a 12 rubber-stamp approval, the settlement hearing also should not be turned into a trial or rehearsal for trial on the merits. (7-Eleven, supra, 85 Cal.App.4th at p. 1145 ; accord, Wershba, supra, 91 Cal.App.4th at p. 246 .) “ ‘Neither the trial court nor this cour | 2 | 3 |
Rebney v. Wells Fargo Bankgreen2 sentences2008The court in Rebney v. Wells Fargo Bank, supra, 220 Cal.App.3d 1117 (Rebney) emphasized this precise point: “A finding that the settlement was fair is not dispositive of the attorney fees issue. ‘The test to be applied is whether, at the time a fee sharing agreement is reached, class counsel are placed in a position that might endanger the fair representation of their clients and whether they will be compensated on some basis other than for legal services performed.’ [Citation.] To make the fairness of the settlement the test would encourage concealment of the agreement until after the settlem 2001Proc., § 902; Garrison v. Board of Directors (1995) 36 Cal. App.4th 1670, 1676 , 43 Cal.Rptr.2d 214 ; see also Walker v. City of Mesquite (5th Cir.1988) 858 F.2d 1071, 1074 .) Appellants contend the Reeses, who did not opt out, made appearances at the settlement hearing and objected to the settlement, thus conferring standing on them. ( Rebney v. Wells Fargo Bank (1990) 220 Cal.App.3d 1117, 1131 , 269 Cal.Rptr. 844 .) They contend the other parties, who did not appear at all in the action, have standing even though they opted out. [4] ( Trotsky v. Los Angeles Fed. | 2 | 3 |
Cellphone Termination Fee Casesgreen2 sentences2014The notice must contain an explanation of the proposed settlement and procedures for class members to follow in filing written objections to it and in arranging to appear at the settlement hearing and state any objections to the proposed settlement.’ (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.769(f).)” (Litwin v. iRenew Bio Energy Solutions, LLC (2014) 226 Cal.App.4th 877, 883 ; accord, Cellphone Termination Fee Cases (2010) 186 Cal.App.4th 1380, 1390 .) The notice given to the class members complied with California Rules of Court rule 3.769 by apprising them of the agreement concerning attorneys’ fees. 2014The notice must contain an explanation of the proposed settlement and procedures for class members to follow in filing written objections to it and in arranging to appear at the settlement hearing and state any objections to the proposed settlement.’ (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.769(f).)” (Litwin v. iRenew Bio Energy Solutions, LLC (2014) 226 Cal.App.4th 877, 883 ; accord, Cellphone Termination Fee Cases (2010) 186 Cal.App.4th 1380, 1390 .) The notice given to the class members complied with California Rules of Court rule 3.769 by apprising them of the agreement concerning attorneys’ fees. | 2 | 2 |
Mustachio v. Ohio Farmers Insurancegreen2 sentences1982Co., supra, 85 Cal.App.3d at p. 113 .) The Mustachio court was at pains to note: “There is no contention that defendants are liable for attorney’s fees incurred in this action.” ( 44 Cal.App.3d at p. 362, fn. 4 ; italics added.) Nevertheless, although Mustachio was not there and is not controlling here, it must be conceded that, logically, if the insured may recover attorney fees incurred in negotiating a settlement on a claim of bad faith, it would appear to follow that the insured should also be entitled to recover attorney fees incurred in the prosecution of a bad faith action to secure ben 1982Co., supra, 85 Cal. App.3d at p. 113 .) The Mustachio court was at pains to note: "There is no contention that defendants are liable for attorney's fees incurred in this action. " ( 44 Cal. App.3d at p. 362, fn. 4 ; italics added.) Nevertheless, although Mustachio was not there and is not controlling here, it must be conceded that, logically, if the insured may recover attorney fees incurred in negotiating a settlement on a claim of bad faith, it would appear to follow that the insured should also be entitled to recover attorney fees incurred in the prosecution of a bad faith action to secure | 2 | 2 |
Hak Fu Hung v. Wanggreen2 sentences2018In arguing otherwise, Cortese cites Hung v. Wang (1992) 8 Cal.App.4th 908 , 11 Cal.Rptr.2d 113 ( Hung ), and claims "the legislative history of ... section 1714.10 clearly shows it was written to prohibit conspiracy claims from being filed during litigation in an effort to disrupt a party's relationship with its counsel." But, in Hung , supra , 8 Cal.App.4th at page 920 , 11 Cal.Rptr.2d 113 , the court notes the statute was introduced to address problems faced by defense counsel for insurance companies during "threatened and actual litigation[.]" In any event, Hung was decided based on the for 2018In arguing otherwise, Cortese cites Hung v. Wang (1992) 8 Cal.App.4th 908 , 11 Cal.Rptr.2d 113 ( Hung ), and claims "the legislative history of ... section 1714.10 clearly shows it was written to prohibit conspiracy claims from being filed during litigation in an effort to disrupt a party's relationship with its counsel." But, in Hung , supra , 8 Cal.App.4th at page 920 , 11 Cal.Rptr.2d 113 , the court notes the statute was introduced to address problems faced by defense counsel for insurance companies during "threatened and actual litigation[.]" In any event, Hung was decided based on the for | 1 | 2 |
Comunale v. Traders & General Insurancegreen2 sentences1964Co. (1958) 50 Cal.2d 654, 659 [ 328 P.2d 198 ].) Similarly, in cases involving multiple claims against the insured, some of which fall within the policy coverage and some of which do not, the insurer may be subject to substantial temptation to shape its defense so as to place the risk of loss entirely upon the insured. [fn. 3] (Cf. O'Morrow v. Borad (1946) 27 Cal.2d 794, 798 [ 167 P.2d 483 , 163 A.L.R. 894 ].) Moreover, since defendant here had previously denied all liability under the policy, its sole economic motive for prosecuting a vigorous defense had been eliminated. 1964Co. (1958) 50 Cal.2d 654, 659 [ 328 P.2d 198 ].) Similarly, in cases involving multiple claims against the insured, some of which fall within the policy coverage and some of which do not, the insurer may be subject to substantial temptation to shape its defense so as to place the risk of loss entirely upon the insured. [fn. 3] (Cf. O'Morrow v. Borad (1946) 27 Cal.2d 794, 798 [ 167 P.2d 483 , 163 A.L.R. 894 ].) Moreover, since defendant here had previously denied all liability under the policy, its sole economic motive for prosecuting a vigorous defense had been eliminated. | 1 | 2 |
Voyce v. Superior Courtgreen1 sentence2023Proc., § 581, subd. (b)(2) [dismissal of action requires consent of other parties]; Voyce v. Superior Court (1942) 20 Cal.2d 479, 484 [Code of Civil Procedure’s dismissal provisions apply to will contests].) Moreover, the probate court has jurisdiction over estate administration. (§ 7050.) It has the power to appoint the executor of an estate. (§ 8400.) And it has the power to approve the executor’s settlement of a claim against the estate. (§ 9836.) 3 The probate court therefore had jurisdiction to approve the settlement of Cueva’s paternity claim. | 1 | 1 |
Consumer Cause, Inc. v. Mrs. Gooch's Natural Food Markets, Inc.green1 sentence2016(See Wershba , at pp. 235-236, 110 Cal.Rptr.2d 145 [citing only Trotsky on issue of standing]; Consumer Cause , at pp. 395-396, 25 Cal.Rptr.3d 514 [citing Trotsky and Wershba on issue of standing] . ) Accordingly, we examine Trotsky . *726 In Trotsky , the appellants were unnamed members of the affected class who appeared at a settlement hearing and objected to a proposed settlement of a class action lawsuit. | 1 | 1 |
Levy v. Superior Courtgreen1 sentence2016However, in Blanton v. Womancare, Inc. (1985) 38 Cal.3d 396 , 404- 408 (Blanton), the California Supreme Court made it clear that with respect to actions that compromise a client’s substantial rights, including the settlement of a claim, there is no such presumption, and that an attorney has no apparent authority to settle a claim “merely by virtue of his employment as such.” (Id. at p. 407.) On the contrary, an attorney is not authorized, “merely by virtue of his retention in litigation, to ‘impair the 10 client’s substantial rights or the cause of action itself.’ [Citation.]” (Id. at p. 404. | 1 | 1 |
Cellphone Termination Fee Casesgreen2 sentences2012(Mark, supra, 166 Cal.App.4th at p. 228 .) “[A]ttomeys’ representation of absent class members in settlement negotiations . . . creates an increased potential for a conflict of interest.” (Id. at p. 227.) In a class action, “ ‘full disclosure and consent are many times difficult and frequently impractical to obtain.’ ” (Ibid.) “Because absent class members are not directly involved in the proceedings, oversight to ensure settlements are fair and untainted by conflict is the responsibility of both the class representative and the court.” (Ibid.) “To fulfill its role in protecting absent class m 2012(Mark, supra, 166 Cal.App.4th at p. 228 .) “[A]ttomeys’ representation of absent class members in settlement negotiations . . . creates an increased potential for a conflict of interest.” (Id. at p. 227.) In a class action, “ ‘full disclosure and consent are many times difficult and frequently impractical to obtain.’ ” (Ibid.) “Because absent class members are not directly involved in the proceedings, oversight to ensure settlements are fair and untainted by conflict is the responsibility of both the class representative and the court.” (Ibid.) “To fulfill its role in protecting absent class m | 1 | 1 |
Signal Companies, Inc. v. Harbor Ins. Co.green2 sentences2012In applying this rule to the facts before us, however, we keep in mind that an equitable contribution claim between coinsurers is not based upon contract, but instead involves “ ‘equitable principles designed to accomplish ultimate justice in the bearing of a specific burden.’ ” (Signal Companies, Inc. v. Harbor Ins Co. (1980) 27 Cal.3d 359, 369 [ 165 Cal.Rptr. 799 , 612 P.2d 889 ].) “ ‘California follows the general rule that an insurer that discharges a common obligation of another insurer may seek contribution from the second insurer. [Citations.] The insurers’ “respective obligations flow 2012In applying this rule to the facts before us, however, we keep in mind that an equitable contribution claim between coinsurers is not based upon contract, but instead involves “ ‘equitable principles designed to accomplish ultimate justice in the bearing of a specific burden.’ ” (Signal Companies, Inc. v. Harbor Ins Co. (1980) 27 Cal.3d 359, 369 [ 165 Cal.Rptr. 799 , 612 P.2d 889 ].) “ ‘California follows the general rule that an insurer that discharges a common obligation of another insurer may seek contribution from the second insurer. [Citations.] The insurers’ “respective obligations flow | 1 | 1 |
| Riverside County Department of Public Social Services v. Kimberly S.green | 1 | 1 |
| Bermudez v. Municipal Courtgreen | 1 | 1 |
| Zimmer Paper Products Incorporated v. Berger & Montague, P.C.green | 1 | 1 |
| Thomas v. Albrightgreen | 1 | 1 |
| City of Los Angeles v. Superior Courtgreen | 1 | 1 |
| Shanfeld v. Munsongreen | 1 | 1 |
| Credit Finance Corp. v. Moxgreen | 1 | 1 |
| Diamond Heights Homeowners Ass'n v. National American Insurancegreen | 1 | 1 |
| Phoenix Insurance v. United States Fire Insurancegreen | 1 | 1 |
| cluster 512611green | 1 | 1 |
| cluster 398791green | 1 | 1 |
| cluster 408230green | 1 | 1 |
| Curtis v. State Ex Rel. Department of Transporationgreen | 1 | 1 |
| cluster 757005green | 1 | 1 |
| City of Detroit v. Grinnell Corporation, Manhattan-Ward, Incorporated v. Grinnell Corporation, 1225 Vine Street Building, Inc. v. Grinnell Corporationgreen | 1 | 1 |
| Gerald Faust, an Individual Faust Management Corporation, a Corporation v. The Travelers, a Corporation the Travelers Indemnity Company of Illinoisgreen | 1 | 1 |
| Gribaldo, Jacobs, Jones & Associates v. Agrippina Versicherunges A. G.green | 1 | 1 |
| Granquist v. Sandberggreen | 1 | 1 |
| Thompson v. Halvonikgreen | 1 | 1 |
| Campbell v. Maganagreen | 1 | 1 |
| People v. Hawthornegreen | 1 | 1 |
| Transit Casualty Co. v. Spink Corp.green | 1 | 1 |
| Pacific Export Packers v. Chubb/Pacific Indemnity Groupgreen | 1 | 1 |
| People v. Beverly Bail Bondsgreen | 1 | 1 |
| Hersch v. Citizens Savings & Loan Assn.green | 1 | 1 |
| Comora v. Comprehensive Care Corp.green | 1 | 1 |
| Gruenberg v. Aetna Insurancegreen | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in California. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Stueve v. Berger Kahn
green
2 sentences2025There, the court held Civil Code section 1714.10 barred a claim against attorneys that “arose in the course of the provision of services in connection with the settlement of a claim or dispute, namely, [their client’s] withdrawal” as a partner or member of plaintiff’s business “and request for advice on a new business opportunity that potentially conflicted with [plaintiff’s] interests.” (Klotz, at p. 1352.) Like most cases on the subject (see Stueve, supra, 222 Cal.App.4th at p. 332–333), Klotz did not consider whether the cause of action against the attorney arose from an attempt to contest 2025There, the court held Civil Code section 1714.10 barred a claim against attorneys that “arose in the course of the provision of services in connection with the settlement of a claim or dispute, namely, [their client’s] withdrawal” as a partner or member of plaintiff’s business “and request for advice on a new business opportunity that potentially conflicted with [plaintiff’s] interests.” (Klotz, at p. 1352.) Like most cases on the subject (see Stueve, supra, 222 Cal.App.4th at p. 332–333), Klotz did not consider whether the cause of action against the attorney arose from an attempt to contest | 2 | 2018–2025 |
Klotz v. Milbank, Tweed, Hadley & McCloy CA2/1
green
2 sentences2018For example, in Klotz , supra , 238 Cal.App.4th at page 1352 , 190 Cal.Rptr.3d 379 , the court determined a partner's request for advice from an attorney on a new business opportunity that potentially conflicted with the interests of a partnership constituted "the provision of services in connection with the settlement of a claim or dispute[.]" Similarly *117 here, Cortese's allegations that Sherwood induced her not to challenge Robert's actions as executor of Francesca's estate and trustee of her trust qualify as conduct arising from the compromise or settlement of a dispute. 2018For example, in Klotz , supra , 238 Cal.App.4th at page 1352 , 190 Cal.Rptr.3d 379 , the court determined a partner's request for advice from an attorney on a new business opportunity that potentially conflicted with the interests of a partnership constituted "the provision of services in connection with the settlement of a claim or dispute[.]" Similarly *117 here, Cortese's allegations that Sherwood induced her not to challenge Robert's actions as executor of Francesca's estate and trustee of her trust qualify as conduct arising from the compromise or settlement of a dispute. | 2 | 2018–2018 |
cluster 300648
green
2 sentences2016Trotsky, discussing the standing to appeal issue, stated: "[A]ppellant is a party aggrieved, and has standing to appeal. [Citing Code of Civil Procedure section 902.] This is true even though appellant could instead have 'opted out,' I.e., requested exclusion from the judgment. [Citation.] As stated by the court in Ace Heating & Plumbing [Co.] v. Crane [Co.] [3d Cir. 1971] 453 F.2d 30, 33 ], deciding a similar question under rule 23 of the Federal rules of Civil Procedure,' . . . 2016Trotsky , discussing the standing to appeal issue, stated: "[A]ppellant is a party aggrieved, and has standing to appeal. [Citing Code of Civil Procedure section 902.] This is true even though appellant could instead have 'opted out,' I.e., requested exclusion from the judgment. [Citation.] As stated by the court in Ace Heating & Plumbing [ Co. ] v. Crane [ Co. ] [3d Cir. 1971] [ 453 F.2d 30 , 33], deciding a similar question under rule 23 of the Federal rules of Civil Procedure, '... | 2 | 2016–2016 |
Litwin v. iRenew Bio Energy Solutions, LLC
green
2 sentences2014The notice must contain an explanation of the proposed settlement and procedures for class members to follow in filing written objections to it and in arranging to appear at the settlement hearing and state any objections to the proposed settlement.’ (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.769(f).)” (Litwin v. iRenew Bio Energy Solutions, LLC (2014) 226 Cal.App.4th 877, 883 ; accord, Cellphone Termination Fee Cases (2010) 186 Cal.App.4th 1380, 1390 .) The notice given to the class members complied with California Rules of Court rule 3.769 by apprising them of the agreement concerning attorneys’ fees. 2014The notice must contain an explanation of the proposed settlement and procedures for class members to follow in filing written objections to it and in arranging to appear at the settlement hearing and state any objections to the proposed settlement.’ (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.769(f).)” (Litwin v. iRenew Bio Energy Solutions, LLC (2014) 226 Cal.App.4th 877, 883 ; accord, Cellphone Termination Fee Cases (2010) 186 Cal.App.4th 1380, 1390 .) The notice given to the class members complied with California Rules of Court rule 3.769 by apprising them of the agreement concerning attorneys’ fees. | 2 | 2014–2014 |
Truck Insurance Exchange v. Unigard Insurance
green
2 sentences2007Co., supra, 79 Cal.App.4th 966 [contribution sought by insurer from coinsurer for defense costs incurred in underlying suit not permitted where coinsurer was not tendered defense or given notice of possible contribution before underlying suit settled].) It follows that Namay’s default was the result of a lack of notice or failure to cooperate and was not attributable to the payment of a settlement or defense costs. 2006(Unigard, supra, 79 Cal.App.4th at p. 974 .) The Continental policy obligated Disney to provide prompt notice of suits, and it also stated: “We shall not be called upon to assume charge of the settlement or defense of any claims made or ‘suits’ brought or proceedings instituted against you, but we shall have the right and be given the opportunity to associate with you in the defense and control of any claim, ‘suit’ or proceedings where the claim or ‘suit’ involves or appears reasonably likely to involve us, in which event, we and you will cooperate in all things in the defense of such claim, ‘ | 2 | 2006–2007 |
Lerette v. Dean Witter Organization, Inc.
green
2 sentences1988There, the court applied the absolute privilege to allegedly defamatory statements made "to achieve the object of the [malpractice] litigation, namely, to settle it." ( Id. at p. 475.) (7) The settlement of a claim is a "well established legal practice." ( Lerette v. Dean *1523 Witter Organization, Inc., supra, 60 Cal. App.3d 573, 577 .) The Lerette court explained: "As any competent attorney is aware, access to the courts is not an end in itself but only one means to achieve satisfaction for a client. 1988There, the court applied the absolute privilege to allegedly defamatory statements made “to achieve the object of the [malpractice] litigation, namely, to settle it.” (Id. at p. 475.) The settlement of a claim is a “well established legal practice.” (Lerette v. Dean Witter Organization, Inc., supra, 60 Cal.App.3d 573, 577 .) The Lerette court explained: “As any competent attorney is aware, access to the courts is not an end in itself but only one means to achieve satisfaction for a client. | 2 | 1988–1988 |
Folsom v. Butte County Assn. of Governments
green
2 sentences1984Though extraordinary fees for Gleis could also have been negotiated as part of the settlement, respondents do not contend that the settlement bars his claim. ( Folsom v. Butte County Assn. of Governments (1982) 32 Cal.3d 668 [ 186 Cal. Rptr. 589 , 652 P.2d 437 ].) Shafer and the charities also waived any claim that any beneficiary had lost its bequest by contesting, or aiding and abetting another to contest, the will. [5] 7 Witkin, Summary of California Law (8th ed. 1974) Wills and Probate, section 362, provides in relevant part: "Although the person named as executor has a duty to produce the 1984Though extraordinary fees for Gleis could also have been negotiated as part of the settlement, respondents do not contend that the settlement bars his claim. ( Folsom v. Butte County Assn. of Governments (1982) 32 Cal.3d 668 [ 186 Cal. Rptr. 589 , 652 P.2d 437 ].) Shafer and the charities also waived any claim that any beneficiary had lost its bequest by contesting, or aiding and abetting another to contest, the will. [5] 7 Witkin, Summary of California Law (8th ed. 1974) Wills and Probate, section 362, provides in relevant part: "Although the person named as executor has a duty to produce the | 2 | 1984–1984 |
Kullar v. Foot Locker Retail, Inc.
green
1 sentence2023Third, although the moving parties have the burden to show that a proposed settlement is fair and reasonable, “in the final analysis it is the court that bears the responsibility to ensure that the recovery represents a reasonable compromise . . . .” (Kullar, supra, 168 Cal.App.4th at p. 129 .) While the trial court should not give a 12 rubber-stamp approval, the settlement hearing also should not be turned into a trial or rehearsal for trial on the merits. (7-Eleven, supra, 85 Cal.App.4th at p. 1145 ; accord, Wershba, supra, 91 Cal.App.4th at p. 246 .) “ ‘Neither the trial court nor this cour | 1 | 2023–2023 |
7-Eleven Owners For Fair Franchising v. Southland Corp.
green
1 sentence2023Third, although the moving parties have the burden to show that a proposed settlement is fair and reasonable, “in the final analysis it is the court that bears the responsibility to ensure that the recovery represents a reasonable compromise . . . .” (Kullar, supra, 168 Cal.App.4th at p. 129 .) While the trial court should not give a 12 rubber-stamp approval, the settlement hearing also should not be turned into a trial or rehearsal for trial on the merits. (7-Eleven, supra, 85 Cal.App.4th at p. 1145 ; accord, Wershba, supra, 91 Cal.App.4th at p. 246 .) “ ‘Neither the trial court nor this cour | 1 | 2023–2023 |
Fiege v. Cooke
green
1 sentence2022(Fiege v. Cooke (2004) 125 Cal.App.4th 1350 , 1353–1355 (Fiege).) In that situation, the appellate court in Fiege held it would be unnecessary and superfluous for the insured parties to appear at the settlement hearing or to give express assent to the terms of settlement reached by the insurance carrier. | 1 | 2022–2022 |
Powers v. City of Richmond
green
2 sentences2018The notice must contain an explanation of the proposed settlement and procedures for class members to follow in filing written objections to it and in arranging to appear at the settlement hearing and state any objections to the proposed settlement." The rules also state that "[b]efore final approval, the court must conduct an inquiry into the fairness of the proposed settlement." ( Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.769(g).) The right to appeal judgments in state civil actions, including class actions, is entirely statutory, so long as the Legislature does not " ' "substantially impair the constitut 2018The notice must contain an explanation of the proposed settlement and procedures for class members to follow in filing written objections to it and in arranging to appear at the settlement hearing and state any objections to the proposed settlement." The rules also state that "[b]efore final approval, the court must conduct an inquiry into the fairness of the proposed settlement." ( Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.769(g).) The right to appeal judgments in state civil actions, including class actions, is entirely statutory, so long as the Legislature does not " ' "substantially impair the constitut | 1 | 2018–2018 |
Fredrichsen v. City of Lakewood
green
2 sentences2017During discovery, it was determined that the defective sidewalk was in fact maintained by the city. ( Id . at pp. 355-356, 99 Cal.Rptr. 13 , 491 P.2d 805 .) After the city was added as a defendant, it demurred to the complaint on the ground that no claim had been filed against it. ( Ibid . ) Our Supreme Court concluded that as a matter of law, the city was estopped from asserting noncompliance with the Government Claims Act: "In the instant case, plaintiff immediately inquired as to the proper procedure and form for filing her claim, which indicates her willingness to supply whatever informati 2017During discovery, it was determined that the defective sidewalk was in fact maintained by the city. ( Id . at pp. 355-356, 99 Cal.Rptr. 13 , 491 P.2d 805 .) After the city was added as a defendant, it demurred to the complaint on the ground that no claim had been filed against it. ( Ibid . ) Our Supreme Court concluded that as a matter of law, the city was estopped from asserting noncompliance with the Government Claims Act: "In the instant case, plaintiff immediately inquired as to the proper procedure and form for filing her claim, which indicates her willingness to supply whatever informati | 1 | 2017–2017 |
Blanton v. Womancare, Inc.
green
1 sentence2016However, in Blanton v. Womancare, Inc. (1985) 38 Cal.3d 396 , 404- 408 (Blanton), the California Supreme Court made it clear that with respect to actions that compromise a client’s substantial rights, including the settlement of a claim, there is no such presumption, and that an attorney has no apparent authority to settle a claim “merely by virtue of his employment as such.” (Id. at p. 407.) On the contrary, an attorney is not authorized, “merely by virtue of his retention in litigation, to ‘impair the 10 client’s substantial rights or the cause of action itself.’ [Citation.]” (Id. at p. 404. | 1 | 2016–2016 |
Regents of the University of California v. Sumner
green
1 sentence2013(Regents of University of California v. Sumner (1996) 42 Cal.App.4th 1209, 1213 .) Mr. Eull did not object to testimony regarding the efforts of the Glenns to have Mr. Eull withdraw his claims. | 1 | 2013–2013 |
Howard v. Schaniel
green
1 sentence2013Exchange v. Bennett (1997) 53 Cal.App.4th 75, 84 .) The false statement must be "maliciously made with the intent to defame." (Howard v. Schaniel (1980) 113 Cal.App.3d 256, 263 .) Thus, in order to prove their case, the Glenns were required to establish that Mr. Eull's damage claim was not made in good faith. | 1 | 2013–2013 |
Truck Ins. Exchange v. Bennett
green
1 sentence2013Exchange v. Bennett (1997) 53 Cal.App.4th 75, 84 .) The false statement must be "maliciously made with the intent to defame." (Howard v. Schaniel (1980) 113 Cal.App.3d 256, 263 .) Thus, in order to prove their case, the Glenns were required to establish that Mr. Eull's damage claim was not made in good faith. | 1 | 2013–2013 |
Coley v. Hecker
green
1 sentence2013Thus, Mr. Eull waived the settlement privilege of Evidence Code section 1152. e. Court's determination that Mr. Eull's refusal to permit inspection of his property damage was unreasonable In announcing its tentative decision in court, the trial court remarked that "Mr. Eull's refusal to allow the Glenns and their representatives and experts to inspect the 10 property without a court order was not reasonable, in light of the surprise allegation which he had raised at the sensitive point of the escrow." Mr. Eull argues: "The impropriety of this finding is grounded in the fact that Mr. Eull had a | 1 | 2013–2013 |
| Mark v. Spencer green | 1 | 2012–2012 |
American Cont'l Ins. Co. v. American Cas. Co. of Reading, PA
green
1 sentence2012Like the court in Safeco, supra, 140 Cal.App.4th at page 879 , we accept the rule set forth in American Continental, supra, 86 Cal.App.4th at page 938 : A critical inquiry in any action for equitable contribution between insurers is whether the nonparticipating coinsurer had a legal obligation to provide a defense or indemnity coverage for the claim prior to the settlement of a claim. | 1 | 2012–2012 |
Safeco Ins. Co. of America v. Superior Ct.
green
1 sentence2012Like the court in Safeco, supra, 140 Cal.App.4th at page 879 , we accept the rule set forth in American Continental, supra, 86 Cal.App.4th at page 938 : A critical inquiry in any action for equitable contribution between insurers is whether the nonparticipating coinsurer had a legal obligation to provide a defense or indemnity coverage for the claim prior to the settlement of a claim. | 1 | 2012–2012 |
| Laskey v. International Union green | 1 | 2009–2009 |
| State of California v. Levi Strauss & Co. green | 1 | 2003–2003 |
| cluster 656623 green | 1 | 2001–2001 |
| Garrison v. Board of Directors green | 1 | 2001–2001 |
| Earley v. Superior Court green | 1 | 2001–2001 |
| Trotsky v. Los Angeles Federal Savings & Loan Ass'n green | 1 | 2001–2001 |
| Kinlaw v. State of California green | 1 | 1997–1997 |
| Jackson v. Johnson green | 1 | 1996–1996 |
| Barney v. Aetna Casualty & Surety Co. green | 1 | 1995–1995 |
| Casa De Valley View Owner's Assn. v. Stevenson green | 1 | 1991–1991 |
| McConnell v. Underwriters at Lloyds green | 1 | 1991–1991 |
| In Re \Agent Orange\" Product Liability Litigation. (Appeal of David Dean)" green | 1 | 1990–1990 |
| Commercial Union Assurance Companies v. Safeway Stores, Inc. green | 1 | 1990–1990 |
| Far West Financial Corp. v. D & S Company green | 1 | 1988–1988 |
| Oxnard Union High School District v. Teachers Insurance green | 1 | 1986–1986 |
| People v. Lent green | 1 | 1985–1985 |
| In Re the Complaint of American Export Lines, Inc. green | 1 | 1984–1984 |
| Twentieth Century-Fox Film Corp. v. Harbor Insurance green | 1 | 1982–1982 |
| Royal Globe Insurance v. Superior Court red | 1 | 1982–1982 |
| Continental Casualty Co. v. Reserve Insurance green | 1 | 1979–1979 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.