Claim Ownership

Author:

Subscribed: 0Played: 0
Share

Description

 Episodes
Reverse
After amassing $100 million for his personal-injury clients, Gerry Spence Trial Lawyer’s College alumnus Kyle Schneberg started Bedsore Law, a national law firm protecting the rights of elders in nursing homes. Kyle sits down with California Appellate Law Podcast co-hosts Jeff Lewis and Tim Kowal to discuss:The different approaches taken by personal injury attorneys, from “billboard attorneys” to settlement mills to big-dollar jury trials, and in between.How has California’s MICRA cap on medical-injury cases affected victims’ ability to get justice?What is the Gerry Spence College like?Nursing-home injuries and the changing needs in that space.Kyle Schneberg’s biography, LinkedIn profile, and Instagram feed.Appellate Specialist Jeff Lewis' biography, LinkedIn profile, and Twitter feed.Appellate Specialist Tim Kowal's biography, LinkedIn profile, Twitter feed, and YouTube page.Sign up for Tim Kowal’s Weekly Legal Update, or view his blog of recent cases.Use this link to get a 25% lifetime discount on Casetext.Other items discussed in the episode:Tim’s summary of Trujillo v. City of Los Angeles. And Kubiak v. COUNTY OF RAVALLI, No. 21-35542 (9th Cir. May 3, 2022), coming to the opposition conclusion from Trujillo.Babylon Bee’s Amicus brief here.Videos from this episode will be posted at Tim Kowal’s YouTube channel.
M.C. Sungaila has advocated at some of the highest levels of appellate law, and last year took her experience and her heart for mentoring and public interest work to the Portia Project podcast, where she distills the wisdom and experience of women judges, justices, and top attorneys in the nation.M.C. sits down with Tim Kowal and Jeff Lewis on the California Appellate Law Podcast to discuss some of the insights and recurring themes and advice she’s gleaned from having interviewed now over 100 of the most successful women in the legal profession today:The “watershed moment” in the 1980s when Sandra Day O’Connor became the first woman on the Supreme Court, opening the floodgates for women in law.The varied paths to the bench, taken by lawyers who never thought it possible.A law degree doesn’t just mean one thing, and success sometimes mean failing at your first try, second try, etc., until you find the right fit.The disconnect between lawyers and judges: Advocates are looking for an outcome, but appellate judges are looking for an opinion.Appellate judges look at oral argument as another part of their process in preparing to make their decision. Don’t look at oral argument as just an isolated 30-60 minutes—that’s not how the panel sees it.Then we turn the tables on M.C. and ask her the “lightning round” questions she asks of her Portia Project guests.M.C. Sungaila’s biography and LinkedIn profile.Listed to M.C.’s podcast, The Portia Project.Appellate Specialist Jeff Lewis' biography, LinkedIn profile, and Twitter feed.Appellate Specialist Tim Kowal's biography, LinkedIn profile, Twitter feed, and YouTube page.Sign up for Not To Be Published, Tim Kowal’s weekly legal update, or view his blog of recent cases.Use this link to get a 25% lifetime discount on Casetext.
When the Supreme Court applied lis pendens law inconsistent with the lis pendens statute, Justice Zebrowski wrote a letter that got the attention of the State Bar. That got him on a lis pendens “task force,” which in turn was responsible for convincing the Legislature to amend the lis pendens statutes.This is but one example how Justice John Zebrowski, though retired from the California Court of Appeal since 1999, has served in a number of important roles affecting law and legal practice. On this episode of the California Appellate Law Podcast, Justice Zebrowski tells co-hosts Jeff and Tim about his work on the Law Revision Commission, and the BAJI Committee writing and amending civil jury instructions. But given the low-absorbency rate with jurors, is the practice of jury instructions at trial merely ceremonial? Justice Zebrowski weighs in on that. And what is the difference between BAJI and CACI?Mediating or arbitrating a case? Justice Zebrowski offers some advice from 23 years as a neutral:You can never can lose a case by making it too clear.Initial “group meetings” at mediations are not helpful: they turn into finger-pointing and posturing.Don’t expect a case to settle in one session. Most cases will settle, usually it is just a question of when—which, in turn, usually is a question of when the litigants are ready to lay down their egos.Justice John Zebrowski’s biography.Appellate Specialist Jeff Lewis' biography, LinkedIn profile, and Twitter feed.Appellate Specialist Tim Kowal's biography, LinkedIn profile, Twitter feed, and YouTube page.Sign up for Tim Kowal’s Weekly Legal Update, or view his blog of recent cases.Use this link to get a 25% lifetime discount on Casetext.
Every attorney knows that to reverse an order, it’s not enough to prove error. You also have to prove the error harmed your client. But when the Court of Appeal in Transcon Financial, Inc. v. Reid & Hellyer reversed a sanctions order for the reason that the offending party was not given the full 21-day safe-harbor period (motion was filed a day early), the court did not explain why the one extra day would have mattered.What’s going on here?Jeff and Tim also discuss some other nuts-and-bolts cases that attorneys should bookmark:All defamation lawsuits involving the management of publicly-traded companies are not necessarily SLAPP-able as arising from a public issue. (Heffernan v. Bilzerian.)The 21-Day Safe Harbor Means 21 Days: Motion Filed Day 21 Is Too Early.Don’t Seek Default Without Notifying Opposing Counsel.Oral MSJ ruling cuts off ability to accept 998 offer. (Trujillo v. City of Los Angeles.)Forwarding email to hotel clerk to print destroys the privilege.Good recap on recent church-and-state showdowns: Covid-restrictions on churches are likely unconstitutional where secular establishments are exempted.Other items discussed in the episode:Justice Jackson’s voluble oral argument style, via Adam Feldman.Memes in judicial writing, via Eric Goldman.Videos from this episode will be posted at Tim Kowal’s YouTube channel.Appellate Specialist Tim Kowal's biography, LinkedIn profile, Twitter feed, and YouTube page.Appellate Specialist Jeff Lewis' biography, LinkedIn profile, and Twitter feed.Sign up for “Not To Be Published,” Tim Kowal’s Weekly Legal Update, or view his blog of recent cases.Use this link to get a 25% lifetime discount on Casetext.
If you were a lawyer drawing breath in summer 2022, you heard about the “victory bell” case. A prominent defense attorney, returning to base camp with a stunning victory after defensing a medical malpractice case, rang his firm’s victory bell and announced, the victim “was probably negligently killed, but we kind of made it look like other people did it.” The comment was captured on video, and the internet did its thing.A common hot-take was that the video would undo the verdict. But many appellate attorneys scoffed: an attorney’s puff talk after trial, the cooler heads responded, is not a trial irregularity.Enter Brooke Bove, who wrote the successful new-trial motion in Garcia v. Quraishi that got the judgment vacated. Brooke gives an insider look at trial, and why the defense attorneys reference to an empty chair particularly galled the trial judge.Bove, an Army communications specialist before becoming an appellate attorney, shares her insights into the case and what is coming next, as well as top legal tips and strategies.Brooke Bove’s biography and LinkedIn profile.Appellate Specialist Jeff Lewis' biography, LinkedIn profile, and Twitter feed.Appellate Specialist Tim Kowal's biography, LinkedIn profile, Twitter feed, and YouTube page.Sign up for Tim Kowal’s Weekly Legal Update, or view his blog of recent cases.Use this link to get a 25% lifetime discount on Casetext.Other items discussed in the episode:Episode 42 discussing the “victory bell” case, Garcia v. Quraishi.The LA Times article on the “victory bell “case.The Lawterature PodcastPeace Like a River by Leif Enger.
We attorneys are trained to spot patterns, but many of us are poor at spotting patterns of inefficiency in the way we practice. Ernie “The Attorney” Svenson joins this episode of the California Appellate Law Podcast to explain how lawyers can adopt “systems thinking” to make their practice more effective, efficient, and even more fun.Ernie shares how he learned about efficiency from his judge during his clerkship who, to shave time off the “Oyez, Oyez, Oyez” ceremony, cut the last “Oyez.” And how his judge delegated the task of explaining to new clerks about the edited “Oyez.” Now THAT is systems thinking!Too abstract? How about a taste? Here are Ernie’s “gateway drugs” to get you hooked on legal tech:SaneBox — Most lawyers use some filtering to reduce email load, but SaneBox has really advanced filters that will find you spending less time in your inbox.TextExpander — Everyone sends out routine emails (think: retainer agreements). TextExpander populates an complete email with a macro. (And it will getting your gears turning about other ways to automate your day-to-day.)Automated Calendaring (e.g., Acuity, Calendly) — No attorney should be booking their own appointments.Ernie Svenson’s biography, website, and LinkedIn profile.Appellate Specialist Jeff Lewis' biography, LinkedIn profile, and Twitter feed.Appellate Specialist Tim Kowal's biography, LinkedIn profile, Twitter feed, and YouTube page.Sign up for Tim Kowal’s Weekly Legal Update, or view his blog of recent cases.Use this link to get a 25% lifetime discount on Casetext.Other items discussed in the episode:ErnieTheAttorney.netLaw Firm Autopilot podcastSaneBoxTextExpanderAcuityCalendly
Jeff and Tim discuss some recent cases to add to your attorney toolkit:For personal injury attorneys, a recent civil-criminal crossover case dealing with victims’ right to restitution warns: the right to restitution is not waived unless the criminal case is over or the DA signs off. (People v. Nonaka, (Sep. 30, 2022, 2d Crim. B313848).)Quashing a subpoena based on free speech gives a right to attorney fees. But caution: the court regarded the fees as purely mercenary in this case, and denied them. (Doe v. McLaughlin (Sep. 21, 2022, A161534).)No, Zoom trials are not a substitute for real trials — not unless the Legislature says so before July 1, 2023. (Tim’s post on Rycz v. Sup. Ct. is here.)Beware dismissing appeals, because they’re almost always “with prejudice.” (Tim’s post on Bush v. Cardinale is here.)How to lose your appeal by flubbing the Rule 8.108 appeal extensions. (Tim’s post on Sharma v. Toyota Motor Sales USA, Inc. is here.)We also discuss the Onion’s amicus brief in the US Supreme Court, and the California Supreme Court’s order declining to review whether bees are fish (but which the media interpreted as affirming that bees are, indeed, fish).Appellate Specialist Jeff Lewis' biography, LinkedIn profile, and Twitter feed.Appellate Specialist Tim Kowal's biography, LinkedIn profile, Twitter feed, and YouTube page.Sign up for Tim Kowal’s Weekly Legal Update, or view his blog of recent cases.Use this link to get a 25% lifetime discount on Casetext.Other items discussed in the episode:People v. Nonaka, (Sep. 30, 2022, 2d Crim. B313848).Doe v. McLaughlin (Sep. 21, 2022, A161534).Tim’s post on Rycz v. Sup. Ct. is here.Tim’s post on Bush v. Cardinale is here.Tim’s post on Sharma v. Toyota Motor Sales USA, Inc. is here.Videos from this episode will be posted at Tim Kowal’s YouTube channel.
Before Justice David Thompson left the bench in 2021 to become a private neutral, his colleague Justice Bedsworth called him “hard-headed.” And compassionate. But hard-headed? Justice Thompsons explains what Justice Bedsworth probably meant by that: “I say what I mean,” and he tends to be direct—particularly at oral argument.Justice Thompson discusses his more stringent judicial philosophy when it comes to publishing opinions, and granting writ relief. But he does favor tentative opinions and the use of focus letters to make for more effective oral argument.Justice Thompson also provides some hard-nosed advice to lawyers:On writ petitions: If you don’t convince the panel in the first paragraph, you’ve lost. (But some justices might be more lenient.)On briefing: Get the basics right. Follow the Rules of Court. Explain how the trial court’s error resulted in prejudice. Acknowledge the flaws in your argument. And above all, be true to the record.On using “signposts” in briefing: Transitions between sentences, paragraphs, and thoughts are the way good writers hold their reader’s hand through your brief. And “moreover” is a substandard signpost.On doomed appellate strategies: Rearguing the same theory that lost at trial.On settling on appeal: If the case hinges on a key legal issue, a neutral with experience on the appellate bench may soften a hard position and help bridge a previously insurmountable gap.On oral argument: Never waive. At least show up and offer to answer questions.Justice David A. Thompson (Ret.)’s biography and LinkedIn profile.Appellate Specialist Jeff Lewis' biography, LinkedIn profile, and Twitter feed.Appellate Specialist Tim Kowal's biography, LinkedIn profile, Twitter feed, and YouTube page.Sign up for Tim Kowal’s Weekly Legal Update, or view his blog of recent cases.Use this link to get a 25% lifetime discount on Casetext.Other items discussed in the episode:Court of Appeal press release on Justice Thompson’s retirement.Huerta v. Santa Ana, in which Justice Thompson dissented from an opinion affirming a summary judgment that no reasonable juror could find a dangerous condition that resulted in the tragic deaths of three girls on Halloween night.
The California Supreme Court is getting a new chief justice. What does it mean? The author of prominent legal blog At the Lectern, David Ettinger, joins co-hosts Tim Kowal and Jeff Lewis to look back on Chief Justice Tani Cantil-Sakauye’s 11-year tenure, her legacy, her replacement, Justice Patricia Guerrero—and why is the governor “appointing” a new Supreme Court justice when the state constitution says he needs to “nominate”?David’s critical coverage of Gov. Newsom’s decision to “appoint” rather than “nominate” drew a phone call from the governor’s office, which he discusses.Other topics discussed include:“Taking one for the team”: how the CJ described her decision to write some of the Court’s more controversial opinions.“We don’t need to speak so broadly”: how the CJ described her approach to writing judicial opinions.The Court’s very long “pandemic docket” might have played a role in CJ Cantil-Sakauye’s retirement.When the Supreme Court granted review of the case involving Los Angeles DA Gascon’s challenge to Three Strikes, David suggests the Court might be more interested in the scope and exercise of prosecutorial discretion, rather than taking a blow at Three Strikes directly.When Gov. Jerry Brown got frustrated with the Supreme Court. Today, the Court grants all of Gov. Newsom’s clemency requests, but it denied many of Gov. Brown’s. Why? Turns out, governors get just as frustrated at summary denials as the rest of us do: “Read the ones who were approved and read the ones who were disapproved,” Gov. Brown challenged, “and you tell me what the rule is.”David Ettinger’s biography, LinkedIn profile, and At The Lectern blog.Appellate Specialist Jeff Lewis' biography, LinkedIn profile, and Twitter feed.Appellate Specialist Tim Kowal's biography, LinkedIn profile, Twitter feed, and YouTube page.Sign up for Tim Kowal’s Weekly Legal Update, or view his blog of recent cases.Use this link to get a 25% lifetime discount on Casetext.Other items discussed in the episode:David Ettinger on the Court’s pandemic docket:  https://www.atthelectern.com/pandemic-docket-update/.David Ettinger on the Court’s decline in productivity: https://www.atthelectern.com/whats-ailing-the-california-supreme-court-its-productivity-has-plummeted/.David Ettinger on the Court’s clemency grants and denials: https://www.atthelectern.com/second-times-the-charm-for-lwop-clemency-request/ [”essentially court determinations that the clemency grants would have been abuses of gubernatorial powers”]; https://www.atthelectern.com/it-was-like-a-ton-of-bricks-crushed-me-california-grapples-with-historic-clemency-rejections/ [Gov. Brown: “you tell me what the rule is”];
What happens when the court fails to make required findings? Probably not, because the California Supreme Court says you still have to demonstrate prejudice. But in this episode of the California Appellate Law Podcast, Jeff Lewis and Tim Kowal talk about how, in certain kinds of cases, the prejudice analysis may give a very light touch, and so your chances of reversal are much higher.Some recent cases suggest the courts may be pointing in different directions in appeals involving missing findings.Jeff and Tim also cover some other recent cases that you may want to have in your toolkit:Failing to request a statement of decision changed the outcome of the appeal in Marriage of Burger.Missing findings in a domestic-violence custody case led to reversal in Hutchins v. Hutchins, even though the omission really was not prejudicial.Untimely Appeals May Be Excused If There Was a Mishap with E-Filing, held Garg v. Garg.A Dismissed Appeal Is Not “On the Merits” If the Dismissal Was for Mootness, held Parkford Owners for a Better Community v. Windeshausen.Does the Memo of Costs form have a fatal error by omitting the “penalty of perjury” language? Yes, says a dissenting justice in Srabian v. Triangle Truck Center.Appellate Specialist Jeff Lewis' biography, LinkedIn profile, and Twitter feed.Appellate Specialist Tim Kowal's biography, LinkedIn profile, Twitter feed, and YouTube page.Sign up for Tim Kowal’s Weekly Legal Update, or view his blog of recent cases.Use this link to get a 25% lifetime discount on Casetext.Other items discussed in the episode:Failure to Request a Statement of Decision Changed the Outcome of This AppealCourts Really Mean It That Written Findings Are Required to Rebut the Fam. Code § 3044 Domestic-Violence PresumptionLawyer Toolkit: Untimely Appeals May Be Excused If There Was a Mishap with E-FilingA Dismissed Appeal Is Not “On the Merits” If the Dismissal Was for MootnessArbitration Not Waived by 13 Months of Litigation? Supreme Court to Weigh InFatal Error in Judicial Council Cost Memorandum Form, Says Dissenting JusticeVideos from this episode will be posted at Tim Kowal’s YouTube channel.
As a consensus-maker, Justice James Lambden never published a dissent in his 17 years on the Court of Appeal for the First District, despite sitting between two indomitable personalities in Justice J. Anthony Kline (Gov. Jerry Brown’s legal affairs secretary) and Justice Paul Hearle (Gov. Ronald Reagan’s appointments secretary). Justice Lambden explains why attorneys should direct their briefs to the justice “in the catbird seat,” and what it was like sitting in the catbird seat.Justice Lambden also talks about his single unpublished dissent.Justice Lambden also talks about his time as a judge on the Alameda County Superior Court, the great outdoors, finding and wearing a good hat, and what it’s like for judges to transition to private judging: “Going back out among the bar without wearing the robe is kind of intimidating. Like they say, they don’t laugh at my jokes anymore.”Justice Lambden serves up a lot of sage advice:“Litigation is not like preparing for a battle, it’s more like going on an expedition … like taking a trip across the mountains and encountering different places where you have to do different things.”Hire your appellate attorney before the verdict!Have an elevator-pitch for your case. If you only have arguments but no theme, you’re not ready.On unpublished opinions: Who cares? The California Court of Appeal is not bound even by published decisions, as there is no horizontal stare decisis in our system. If you find good reasoning, use it: if the good argument comes from a published case, make the argument, and cite it. If the good argument comes from an unpublished case, make the argument, but don’t cite it. In either event, it’s not the best citation but the best argument that wins. (This reminds me of Johannes Scotus: “Authority sometimes proceeds from reason, but reason never from authority….We should not allege the opinions of the holy Fathers ... unless it be necessary thereby to strengthen arguments in the eyes of men who, unskillful in reasoning, yield rather to authority than to reason.”)On the importance of focus letters and oral argument.On access to justice, quoting Chief Justice Ronald George: “Without access, there is no justice.”Justice James Lambden’s biography.Appellate Specialist Jeff Lewis' biography, LinkedIn profile, and Twitter feed.Appellate Specialist Tim Kowal's biography, LinkedIn profile, Twitter feed, and YouTube page.Sign up for Tim Kowal’s Weekly Legal Update, or view his blog of recent cases.Use this link to get a 25% lifetime discount on Casetext.
“Something is very wrong with this picture.” This is how the Court of Appeal recently concluded a CEQA case—with finger pointed in CEQA’s direction. Peter Prows, an environmental attorney who handles a lot of CEQA cases, runs down the good, the bad, and the ugly of CEQA. Peter talks with co-hosts Tim Kowal and Jeff Lewis about Tiburon Open Space Comm. v. Cnty. of Marin (May 12, 2022, A159860), which rejected a neighborhood group’s efforts to stymie a development project.Only law nerds are interested in CEQA? Think again: Former Rolling Stone writer Matt Taibbi recently penned an article about how CEQA is thwarting California’s ability to provide housing. We discuss that, too.Peter also supplies Tim’s personal favorite new quote, via Justice Brennan: “See how easy it is to be a City Attorney?… If all else fails, merely amend the regulation and start over again.” (San Diego Gas & Elec. Co. v. City of San Diego (1981) 450 U.S. 621, 655 n.22 (Brennan, J., dissenting).)Also: The government gets anti-SLAPP protection for free speech? (See Vargas v. City of Salinas (2009) 46 Cal.4th 1.) Come on, SCOCA.Finally, on the Lightning Round: A persuasive case for two spaces after a period?Peter Prows’s biography, LinkedIn profile, and Twitter feed.Appellate Specialist Jeff Lewis' biography, LinkedIn profile, and Twitter feed.Appellate Specialist Tim Kowal's biography, LinkedIn profile, Twitter feed, and YouTube page.Sign up for Tim Kowal’s Weekly Legal Update, or view his blog of recent cases.Use this link to get a 25% lifetime discount on Casetext.Other items discussed in the episode:Banks v. Mastorakos, Case No. B309937 (2d Dist., Div. 2 Aug. 16, 2022) (unpublished) [$960 in sanctions against plaintiff for bringing a frivolous motion for reconsideration; affirmed]. But see Brown, Winfield & Canzoneri, Inc. v. Superior Court (2010) 47 Cal.4th 1233, 1249 [“it should not matter whether the “judge has an unprovoked flash of understanding in the middle of the night” [citation] or acts in response to a party's suggestion.”]Where have all the reporters gone?SLAPP motions still available in 9th circuit:
What does the U.S. Supreme Court’s holding in Viking River Cruises, Inc. v. Moriana mean for PAGA claims against employers in California? Employment attorney Eric Kingsley explains how, under Viking River, **employees now may be forced to waive their PAGA claims on a representative basis and arbitrate them individually instead. The holding disapproves the California Supreme Court decision in Iskanian v. CLS Transp. Los Angeles, LLC, 59 Cal.4th 348 as running afoul of the Federal Arbitration Act.Eric explains that the effect of Viking River may be short-lived. The California Supreme Court has already granted review in another case involving whether arbitration may be compelled in a PAGA representative action in Adolph v. Uber Technologies, Inc. Eric explains how the Court may follow the lead offered in Justice Sotomayor’s Viking River concurrence.Eric also shares his experiences litigating in the California Supreme Court, some other interesting employment cases, and the Dr. Sally Ride Memorial Highway.Eric Kingsley’s biography, LinkedIn profile, and Twitter feed.Appellate Specialist Jeff Lewis' biography, LinkedIn profile, and Twitter feed.Appellate Specialist Tim Kowal's biography, LinkedIn profile, Twitter feed, and YouTube page.Sign up for Tim Kowal’s Weekly Legal Update, or view his blog of recent cases.Use this link to get a 25% lifetime discount on Casetext.Other items discussed in the episode:Viking River Cruises, Inc. v. MorianaIskanian v. CLS Transp. Los Angeles, LLC, 59 Cal.4th 348.Adolph v. Uber Technologies, Inc.Kim v. ReinsDr. Sally Ride Memorial Highway
Justice Laurie Zelon spent 19 years on the Court of Appeal for the Second District before retiring in 2020 to work on cases as a mediator, arbitrator, and private judge. Justice Zelon talks with Tim Kowal and Jeff Lewis about:her commitment to serving the community, and why we can’t throw up our hands because our problems are hard;the difference between “litigation attorneys” and “trial attorneys”;the difference between trial-court judging and appellate-court judging (you get time to “put your feet on your desk” and think about the case);the decline of civility (not good for the system, the attorneys, or the clients);using a neutral to evaluate your appeal or writ petition;the secret to a successful writ petition (show why it matters, and why it can’t wait);why remote oral arguments are not as good as in-person.Justice Zelon’s biography at Judicate West and the Court of Appeal.Appellate Specialist Jeff Lewis' biography, LinkedIn profile, and Twitter feed.Appellate Specialist Tim Kowal's biography, LinkedIn profile, Twitter feed, and YouTube page.Sign up for Tim Kowal’s Weekly Legal Update, or view his blog of recent cases.Use this link to get a 25% lifetime discount on Casetext.
Three recent cases remind litigants of some important tips when opposing anti-SLAPP motions:Spending money on litigation is not protected activity if the case is really about the misappropriation of the money. That’s Manlin v. Milner (D2d1 Aug. 10, 2022 Nos. B313253, B315077) 2022 WL 3223817 (nonpub. opn.) (Tim’s writeup is here).Appealing an anti-SLAPP dismissal and attorney-fees award against your client? Cite Quiles v. Parent for its holding that SLAPP fee awards are automatically stayed on appeal (Tim’s writeup is here). Is the trial court refusing to honor the stay? You can seek a writ of supersedeas in the Court of Appeal, but if you want a reasoned opinion, you need direct review. For that, you’ll need to label your motion to enforce the stay as one for injunctive relief.Opposing an anti-SLAPP motion filed outside the 60-day window? Reyes v. Escobar (D2d7 Aug. 12, 2022 No. B313575) 2022 WL 3334384 held that extending the time to file without considering the length of the delay, the reasons offered for the delay, and potential prejudice to the plaintiff, is an abuse of discretion.Also: What questions do you want to hear appellate justices answer? The podcast will be hosting some retired appellate justices in future episodes, and we want to put to them the questions you’ve been itching to have answered. Email Tim at tkowal@tvalaw.com.Appellate Specialist Jeff Lewis' biography, LinkedIn profile, and Twitter feed.Appellate Specialist Tim Kowal's biography, LinkedIn profile, Twitter feed, and YouTube page.Sign up for Tim Kowal’s Weekly Legal Update, or view his blog of recent cases.Use this link to get a 25% lifetime discount on Casetext.Other items discussed in the episode:Manlin v. Milner (D2d1 Aug. 10, 2022 Nos. B313253, B315077) 2022 WL 3223817 (nonpub. opn.) (Tim’s writeup is here).CALP episode 46 on judgment enforcement with Joseph Chora.Quiles v. Parent for its holding that SLAPP fee awards are automatically stayed on appeal (Tim’s writeup is here).Merritt v. Specialized Loan Servicing, LLC (D6 Aug. 11, 2022 No. H048463) 2022 WL 3274131 (Tim’s writeup here).Reyes v. Escobar (D2d7 Aug. 12, 2022 No. B313575) 2022 WL 3334384.First Amendment Case Pertaining to Public Employees: Guffey v. Mauskopf issued Aug 16.
So you won a huge court case? Big deal — can you collect? Judgment enforcement, and defense against judgment enforcement, are critically important to litigants. But enforcement sits in that twilight region in between the trial and the appeal, so most trial and appellate attorneys do not know a lot about it. But Joseph Chora does. Judgment enforcement is all he does.We ask Joseph to share some of his best enforcement tips (a teaser: don’t file fraudulent-transfer actions; file a lien instead—it’s faster, cheaper, and it flips the burden of proof). And some of the biggest pitfalls (e.g., failing to make an enforcement plan early).We also discuss:How to cut off the plaintiff’s right to judgment-enforcement fees — and if you’re the plaintiff, how to avoid thisIncreasing an appellate bondEnforce judgments against a trusteePursuing alter egosUsing evasions of judgment enforcement to get an appeal dismissed under the disentitlement doctrineHow plaintiffs should safeguard against restitution awards if a satisfied judgment is reversed on appealJoseph Chora’s website and LinkedIn profile.Appellate Specialist Jeff Lewis' biography, LinkedIn profile, and Twitter feed.Appellate Specialist Tim Kowal's biography, LinkedIn profile, Twitter feed, and YouTube page.Sign up for Tim Kowal’s Weekly Legal Update, or view his blog of recent cases.Use this link to get a 25% lifetime discount on Casetext.Other items discussed in the episode:Conservatorship of McQueen (2014) 59 Cal.4th 602Gray1 CPB, LLC v. SCC Acquisitions, Inc. (2015) 233 Cal.App.4th 882Wertheim, LLC v. Currency Corp. (D2d1 Oct. 14, 2021) 2021 WL 4785575 (nos. B304655, B310650) [Tim’s post here]Recent case in which plaintiff and defendant agreed to use a general verdict form in exchange for a stipulation to limit judgment enforcement to insurance and indemnitySLAPP Fee Awards Are Automatically Stayed on Appeal: Tim’s Article in Cal. LitigationDr. Leevil, LLC v. Westlake Health Care Ctr.  (D2d6 Mar. 17, 2021) no. B304339 (non-pub.) (writeup here)
Business litigators need to know about the civil-theft remedies under Penal Code section 496. In your next fraud, conversion, breach of fiduciary duty, or even breach of contract case, consider whether your facts fit Siry Investment, L.P. v. Farkhondehpour (Cal. Jul. 21, 2022 No. S262081). If so, treble damages and attorney fees under section 496 may be supported.Jeff and Tim also discuss what to do when after a judgment is reversed but an appeal of a post-judgment fee award is still pending. Mid-Wilshire Property, L.P. v. Dr. Leevil, LLC (D4d3 Juul. 20, 2022 no. G059899) 2022 WL 2824967 (nonpub. opn.).Finally, two appellate courts suggest different attitudes toward appellate sanctions: Shiheiber v. JPMorgan Chase Bank (D1d2 Jul. 26, 2022) No. A160188, urging attorney to think twice about “clogging the docket”; and Pop Top Corp. v. Rakuten Kobo Inc. (Fed. Cir. July 14, 2022) No. 2021-2174, in which the dissent suggested the majority had imposed $107,000 in sanctions merely for filing a “weak case.” As the dissent warned, the right of appellate review applies even to weak cases.Appellate Specialist Jeff Lewis' biography, LinkedIn profile, and Twitter feed.Appellate Specialist Tim Kowal's biography, LinkedIn profile, Twitter feed, and YouTube page.Sign up for Tim Kowal’s Weekly Legal Update, or view his blog of recent cases.Use this link to get a 25% lifetime discount on Casetext.Links & other items discussed in the episode:Supreme Court Affirms the Use of Powerful Civil-Theft Remedies Under Penal Code 496 in Business-Tort CasesWhat Happens to a Fee Award After the Judgment Is Reversed? Try a Stipulated ReversalShould Bad Arguments Be Sanctionable? Some Recent TakesCalifornia Enacts Gun Control Law Modeled on Texas' SB 8 Anti-Abortion LawCA and TX’s new statutes allowing private rights of action (on guns & abortion, respectively);School officials cannot block constituents from social mediaCan footnotes get you sanctione
“The incentives are out of whack,” says Eric Post, a tenant’s rights attorney with BASTA, Inc. The past two years have seen a dramatic increase in evictions, he says. Why? Because that is the simplest way to raise the rent.Eric talks with Jeff Lewis and Tim Kowal about the flaws in California’s landlord-tenant legal system, the near-impossibility of staying eviction judgments pending appeal, and the important differences between appeals in the appellate division and the Court of Appeal.Eric also explains why it can be fairly easy to forum shop a case up to unlimited civil.Finally, the discussion turns to Judge Carter’s bold effort to solve a piece of the Los Angeles homeless problem via injunction, though ultimately reversed by the 9th Circuit last year.Eric Post’s LinkedIn profile.Appellate Specialist Jeff Lewis' biography, LinkedIn profile, and Twitter feed.Appellate Specialist Tim Kowal's biography, LinkedIn profile, and Twitter feed.Sign up for Tim Kowal’s Weekly Legal Update, or view his blog of recent cases.Receive a 25% lifetime discount on Casetext at CaseText.com/CALP.Other items discussed in the episode:BASTA, Inc.Episode 18 with tenant’s rights attorney Fran Campbell.Tim’s post on Judge David Carter’s homelessness injunction overturned by the 9th Circuit: $1 Billion LA Homelessness Injunction Reversed by 9th Circuit: Judge's Independent Factual Investigation Was Improper
Reviewing a recent book on persuasion trial trips based in science, Stefan Love’s conclusion is that the tips are in greater abundance than the science. True, there is much interesting science on the limits of human attention: for example, you can get a jury to remember a few things, but one too many and they forget it all. But does this mean you should ditch a particular piece of secondary evidence at trial? That, as ever, still comes down to discretion and common sense.Stefan talks with Jeff Lewis and Tim Kowal about some of the other helpful trial advice in John Blumberg’s Persuasion Science for Trial Lawyers, and whether it is scientific, or just common sense. Advice like:Excessive information can lead to worse, not better, decisions.Juries learn better with pictures. But avoid competition for resources: do not use written word, spoken word, and images all at the same time. It creates overload.You should not present all your evidence at trial, because it overloads the jury’s cognitive capacity.Judges who strive to run ruthlessly efficient trials should reconsider: eliminating downtime actually undermines jurors’ ability to process the information.For the same reason, trial lawyers should slow down, use repetition, and even stop talking every now and then.Stefan Love’s biography and LinkedIn profile.Appellate Specialist Jeff Lewis' biography, LinkedIn profile, and Twitter feed.Appellate Specialist Tim Kowal's biography, LinkedIn profile, Twitter feed, and YouTube page.Sign up for Tim Kowal’s Weekly Legal Update, or view his blog of recent cases.Use this link to get a 25% lifetime discount on Casetext.Other items discussed in the episode:Arkansas Times LP v. Mark Waldrip, U.S. Court of Appeals Case No: 19-1378 [upholding AK law requiring public contracts to include a certification that the contractor will not “boycott” Israel].Gascón asks Supreme Court to decide constitutionality of three strikes law.Judge admonished over bias and bad temperament.
When you look up an answer whether an order is appealable, the cases are supposed to give you straight answers. But here are three cases that give surprising answers. (Ok, really just two — if you are surprised by the second one, you were mistaken.)Reed v. Aviva USA Corp. (See Tim’s writeup on Reed here.)Liang v. Shi  (See Tim’s writeup on Liang here.)Marriage of Deal  (See Tim’s write up on Deal here.)Also: Counsel horse-traded verdict forms in a recent med-mal case in Silvester v. Niparko for limitations on judgment-enforcement. (See Tim’s write up on Silvester here.)Other items discussed in the episode:Brach v. Newsom (9th Cir., June 15, 2022, No. 20-56291), denying the challenge to a Covid-19 school closures  as moot. But not all judges agree on this point of mootness, as a LASC judge recently struck down a LAUSD vaccine mandate.Field v. U.S. Bank (June 9, 2022, B309111): Evasive discovery responses used against the responding party on MSJ.The “victory bell” case in which successful counsel bragged about their defense in a medical-malpractice case, describing the case as involving “a guy that was probably negligently killed, but we kind of made it look like other people did it.”Appellate Practice Network launches! Members have access to the statewide network of appellate attorneys through a free listserve. Click HERE to join the Appellate Practice Network.Appellate Specialist Jeff Lewis' biography, LinkedIn profile, and Twitter feed.Appellate Specialist Tim Kowal's biography, LinkedIn profile, and Twitter feed.Sign up for Tim Kowal’s Weekly Legal Update, or view his blog of recent cases.Sign up to Casetext and receive a 25% lifetime discount at CaseText.com/CALP.
Comments 
loading
Download from Google Play
Download from App Store