Eric v. Cajon Valley Unified School District (2009) 174 Cal.App.4th 285, 95 Cal.Rptr.3d 428
Action against school district; 6 year old struck by car after leaving school bus; Court of Appeal reversed summary judgment for the school district and remanded the matter for trial.

Cacho v. Boudreau (2007) 40 Cal.4th 341, 53 Cal.Rptr.3d 43
State statute regarding mobilehome parks did not preempt a local rent control provision permitting property tax pass-throughs assessments against space lessees; Supreme Court reversed Court of Appeal and trial court rulings.

Hinckley v La Mesa R. V. Center (1984) 158 CA3d 630, 205 CR 22
Court of Appeals reversed lower court’s directed verdict in favor of defendant. Judge Earl Maas, Jr., Hollywood and Neil, Michael Neil, 1010 Second Ave., Suite 1712, San Diego, telephone: 619-238-1712 defense counsel. Plaintiffs purchased a new mobile home with a warranty. During the warranty period the vehicle caught fire while plaintiffs were traveling on the highway. Plaintiffs were forced to jump from the motorhome causing serious injuries. The court of appeals ruled that the doctrines of strict liability, negligence, res ipsa loquitur were established. The consumer did not have to prove why the fire started, especially in light of the fact that the motorhome was totally destroyed in the fire. After reversal, seven years later, plaintiffs obtained a substantial recovery in excess of $100,000 on account of serious injuries sustained.

Marois v Royal Investigations (1984) 162 CA3d 193, 208 CR 384
Court of appeals reversed non-suit entered in favor of defendant. Plaintiff was injured when he was a patron at Jack-in-the-Box in Vista. Jack-in-the-Box had retained defendant to provide security for its patrons. Plaintiff was seriously beaten. The security guards watched and did nothing while this took place. After reversal a jury entered a verdict in excess of $100,000 to compensate plaintiff. Defense counsel, Hollywood and Neil, by David G. Brown, 1010 Second Ave., Suite 1712, San Diego, telephone 619-238-1712.

Pellegrini v Aycock
Santa Cruz Superior Court. Judge William Kelsay, 701 Ocean Street, Santa Cruz, telephone 408-425-2441. In 1982 a jury entered a judgment against defendant Aycock in the amount of $650,000. Defendant was represented by local counsel. Defendant retained my office to handle the matter on appeal. The case was reversed by the court of appeal in San Francisco in a non-published opinion. The matter went to trial in February 1988 before Judge Kelsay without jury. Cornblum acted as trial counsel in the second trial. Defense verdict for client with fees awarded amounting to $175,000.

Herzog v “A” Company (1983) 138 CA3d 656, 188 CR 155
Herzog held that the absolute privilege for communications made pursuant to civil code 47 (2) applied only to litigation contemplated in good faith. This has become an important exception to the absolution privilege for communications where the communications are made for purposes of harming another.

Schlussel v Schlussel (1983) 41 CA3d 194, 190 CR 95
Schlussel demonstrates the principal that even though an act is done elsewhere (New York), if it has effects within the state, the state may have jurisdiction over the litigation notwithstanding the non-residence of the defendant.

McKay v County of San Diego (1980) 111 CA3d 251, 168 CR 442
McKay held that a government-arresting official was not immune from suit where said individual obtained an arrest warrant from a magistrate by furnishing false information in an affidavit.

Cornblum v San Diego Board of Supervisors (1980) 110 CA3d 976, 168 CR 294
Taxpayers’ actions to prevent illegal expenditure of public funds are authorized by CCP §526A. Cornblum v Board of Supervisors extended the doctrine to permit private taxpayers the right to challenge the propriety of executive acts or failures to act where the fundamental rights of citizens guaranteed in the California Constitution are being violated.

Allen v Toledo (1980) 190 CA3d 415, 167 CR 270
This case held that an owner of a vehicle to an incompetent driver and prior accidents of the driver are admissible on the issue of defendant’s knowledge of the driver’s unfitness.

Figi v. New Hampshire Insurance (1980) 108 CA3d 772, 166 CR 774
Business rendered between a neutral appraiser and the insurance company’s appraiser made the neutral appraiser “interested” as a matter of law and furnished a basis for vacating an appraisal award. Figi has become a cornerstone decision in the field of appraisal. It establishes the simple principle that a neutral arbitrator or appraiser must be truly neutral.

Delos v Farmers Insurance (1979) 93 CA3d 642, 155 CR 843
Delos held that a corporation which was acting as a management organization or attorney in fact for an interinsurance exchange could be held liable for breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing.

Reuter v Superior Court (1979) 93 CA3d 332, 155 CR 525
In Reuter plaintiff mother served as executrix of her husband’s estate and as guardian ad litem for her son who was injured. The defense wanted a psychologist to examine the injured son and also the mother. The Court of Appeals held that the mother’s mental condition was not in controversy and therefore, the mother could not be compelled to submit to psychological examination merely on the grounds that she may have influenced her son’s mental state.

Greatorx v Board of Administration (1979) 91 CA3d 54, 57, 154 CR 37
This case held that a decision of the Worker’s Compensation Appeals Board was binding upon the retirement board of the City. Thus, Workers’ Compensation decisions have the effect of constitutional courts.

Ewing v Cloverleaf Bowl (1978) 20 C3d 389, 143 CR 13
(discussed extensively in 6 Witkin Summary (9th) Torts Section 880, pp. 246-250). In Ewing decedent reached his 21st birthday. The bartender, ostensibly participating in the celebration of this event, served decedent full shots of one ounce 151 proof rum. The 21 year old boy did not know what he was drinking. The defendant bartender contended he was immune from suit. The lower court agreed and granted a non-suit. The Supreme Court reversed.

International Associates of Fire Fighters v City of San Diego (1983) 34 C3d 292, 193 CR 871
Holding a pension system may be modified prior to employee retirement for the limited purpose of keeping the system flexible and to maintain the integrity of the system.

Willden v Washington National Insurance (1976) 18 C3d 631, 135 CR 69
Willden held that the “process of nature” rule means within the terms of a health policy that the onset of disability relates back to the time of the accident itself, whenever disability arises directly from an accident within such time as process of nature consumes in bringing the person affected to total disability.

Lee v Brown (1976) 18 C3d 110, 132 CR 649 discussed 9 Witkin (3d) Cal.
Procedure Appeals Section 168, pp 180-182. Lee held that the general rule of waiver of appeal by accepting benefits did not apply under the homestead exemption in that the homeowner must be paid his homestead exemption upon sale and thus acceptance of same would not preclude the homeowner from appealing a judgment causing said home to be sold.

National Insurance Underwriters v Carter (1976) 17 C3d 380, 387
Holding a policy excluding coverage where an aircraft is operated by an unqualified pilot is valid.

Schwalbe v Jones (1976) 16 C3d 514, 128 CR 321
Holding that an owner riding as a passenger in his own vehicle could not sue the driver for ordinary negligence as being barred by the guest law under Vehicle Code §17158. This decision was overruled by the Supreme Court two years later in Cooper v Bray (1978) 21 C3d 841, 148 CR 148.

Hurd v Republic Insurance (1981) 113 CA3d 250, 169 CR 676
Holding that contents contained in a dwelling were covered under a dwelling policy where the exclusion was ambiguous.

Woolett v American Employees Insurance (1978) 77 CA3d 619, 143 CR 799
Holding that an action upon a judgment must be brought against the insurance company within four years.

Varco-Pruden Inc. v Hampshire Construction Co (1975) 50 CA3d 654, 123 CR 606
Holding that contractual provision indemnifying the building owner for losses arising out of or in connection with damage to property in connection or by reason of performance of work by the contractor could not serve as the basis for rendering a subcontractor liable to the owner for fire damage to a partially constructed building.

Vincent v Grayson (1973) 30 CA3d 899, 106 CR 733
Discussed 8 Witkin (3d) Cal. Proc., Enforcement of Judgment Section 394, p. 336 holding that joint debtor proceedings under CCP §993 does not permit amendment to a complaint to raise new issues of fact giving rise to a different legal obligation.

In re Abrams (1980) 108 CA3d 685, 166 CR 749
Holding that a contempt sanction may not be imposed upon a witness for failure to appear unless the subpena was personally served on the witness.

Collins v Tippitt (1984) 156 CA3d 1017, 203 CR 366
Holding that the defendant who owned a home on a cliff above a beach was immune from tort when part of the cliff supporting the home broke away and landed on the plaintiff who was sunbathing on the beach.

Martin v Phillips Petroleum (1974) 42 CA3d 916, 117 CR 269.
Plaintiff’s suit was held barred by Workers’ Compensation exclusive remedy law even though the written contract defined plaintiff as an independent contractor.

Leach Co. v Superior Court (1968) 266 CA2d 493, 72 CR 216
Holding that the mere presence in the State, of equipment by foreign corporations, was sufficient to establish jurisdiction.

Associated Students v Trustees of California State Colleges (1976) 56 CA3d 667, 128 CR 601
Holding that a university president could reject a student body organization budget when he concluded it was not in conformity with the policy of the campus.