A Legal and Business Portal-Home Page

California Civil Procedure
California Appellate Court
Case Summaries
February 27, 2004

California Appellate Court
Case Law Case Summaries:
2004/03/01 Mon PM 01:09:52 CST

TABLE OF CONTENTS

CIVIL PROCEDURE, FAMILY LAW
* LUNDAHL v. TELFORD

CIVIL RIGHTS, CONSTITUTIONAL LAW, CYBERSPACE LAW, INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY, TRADE
SECRETS
* DVD COPY CONTROL ASS'N INC. v. BUNNER

CLASS ACTIONS, CONSTITUTIONAL LAW, PROPERTY LAW & REAL ESTATE, SECURITIES LAW
* HARRIS v. WESTLY

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW, CRIMINAL LAW & PROCEDURE, EVIDENCE, SENTENCING
* PEOPLE v. FUENTES

CONTRACTS, LANDLORD TENANT LAW, PROPERTY LAW & REAL ESTATE
* MINER v. TUSTIN AVE. INVESTORS, LLC

CRIMINAL LAW & PROCEDURE
* PEOPLE v. QUACH

CRIMINAL LAW & PROCEDURE, SENTENCING
* PEOPLE v. BURNETT

EVIDENCE, INJURY AND TORT LAW, LABOR & EMPLOYMENT LAW, PRODUCT LIABILITY
* GRADLE v. DOPPELMAYR USA, INC.

========================================================================

CIVIL PROCEDURE, FAMILY LAW

LUNDAHL v. TELFORD, No. G030846 (Cal. 4th App. Dist. February 27,
2004)
The Uniform Interstate Family Support Act does not establish a
mechanism for settling upon a single order as controlling among
multiple spousal support orders. The parties' 1977 divorce decree in
California did not invest California with exclusive jurisdiction
over spousal support, thus the trial court's order confirming
registration of the Utah support orders is affirmed.

To read the full text of this opinion, go to:
http://login.findlaw.com/scripts/callaw?dest=ca/caapp4th/slip/2004/g030846.html
[PDF File]
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data2/californiastatecases/g030846.pdf


CIVIL RIGHTS, CONSTITUTIONAL LAW, CYBERSPACE LAW, INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY, TRADE
SECRETS

DVD COPY CONTROL ASS'N INC. v. BUNNER, No. H021153 (Cal. 6th App.
Dist. February 27, 2004)
Preliminary injunction under California's Uniform Trade Secrets Act
is reversed. Plaintiff presented no evidence as to when defendant
first posted the computer program "DeCSS," and no evidence that the
technology therein was still a secret at that time; evidence shows
that by the time plaintiff sought the injunction, DeCSS had been so
widely distributed that the technology may have lost its trade
secret status.

To read the full text of this opinion, go to:
http://login.findlaw.com/scripts/callaw?dest=ca/caapp4th/slip/2004/h021153a.html
[PDF File]
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data2/californiastatecases/h021153a.pdf


CLASS ACTIONS, CONSTITUTIONAL LAW, PROPERTY LAW & REAL ESTATE, SECURITIES LAW

HARRIS v. WESTLY, No. B160741 (Cal. 2d App. Dist. January 29, 2004)
The notice provisions of the Unclaimed Property Law do not require
the California Controller to provide notice to apparent owners of
the escheated stock before the Controller sells the stock. Sale of
escheated stock without notice to the owners does not violate the
due process provisions of the federal or state constitutions.

To read the full text of this opinion, go to:
http://login.findlaw.com/scripts/callaw?dest=ca/caapp4th/slip/2004/b160741.html
[PDF File]
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data2/californiastatecases/b160741.pdf


CONSTITUTIONAL LAW, CRIMINAL LAW & PROCEDURE, EVIDENCE, SENTENCING

PEOPLE v. FUENTES, No. G030438 (Cal. 4th App. Dist. February 26,
2004)
Battery is a lesser included offense of robbery in a case in which
the charging document alleges "force and fear." Here, the trial
court's error in failing to instruct the jury on battery was not
reversible; there is no reasonable probability the jury would have
convicted defendant of battery rather than robbery, if instructed on
both crimes.

To read the full text of this opinion, go to:
http://login.findlaw.com/scripts/callaw?dest=ca/caapp4th/slip/2004/g030438.html
[PDF File]
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data2/californiastatecases/g030438.pdf


CONTRACTS, LANDLORD TENANT LAW, PROPERTY LAW & REAL ESTATE

MINER v. TUSTIN AVE. INVESTORS, LLC, No. G031703, G032006 (Cal. 4th
App. Dist. February 27, 2004)
Where an ambiguous Lease and Estoppel Certificate constitute the
contract to be interpreted, and no extrinsic evidence is offered to
explain the ambiguity, the language is interpreted against
defendant-landlord, whose predecessor drafted both documents.
Because defendant failed to establish that plaintiff-tenant did not
have an option, summary judgment for defendant is reversed.

To read the full text of this opinion, go to:
http://login.findlaw.com/scripts/callaw?dest=ca/caapp4th/slip/2004/g031703.html
[PDF File]
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data2/californiastatecases/g031703.pdf


CRIMINAL LAW & PROCEDURE

PEOPLE v. QUACH, No. G027470 (Cal. 4th App. Dist. February 27, 2004)
The trial court erred in instructing the jury with CALJIC No. 5.56,
which affords the right of self-defense to a mutual combatant only
after, inter alia, he has informed his opponent that he has stopped
fighting and given his opponent the opportunity to stop. The jury
could reasonably have concluded that this was a mutual combat
situation, likely referred to CALJIC No. 5.56, and been misinformed
on the crucial test to be applied to such facts.
Such error requires reversal of defendant's conviction of attempted
murder.

To read the full text of this opinion, go to:
http://login.findlaw.com/scripts/callaw?dest=ca/caapp4th/slip/2004/g027470.html
[PDF File]
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data2/californiastatecases/g027470.pdf


CRIMINAL LAW & PROCEDURE, SENTENCING

PEOPLE v. BURNETT, No. C042540 (Cal. 3d App. Dist. February 27,
2004)
The omission of a sex offender fine pursuant to Penal Code section
290.3 on a silent record does not constitute an unauthorized
sentence that may be corrected on appeal.

To read the full text of this opinion, go to:
http://login.findlaw.com/scripts/callaw?dest=ca/caapp4th/slip/2004/c042540.html
[PDF File]
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data2/californiastatecases/c042540.pdf


EVIDENCE, INJURY AND TORT LAW, LABOR & EMPLOYMENT LAW, PRODUCT LIABILITY

GRADLE v. DOPPELMAYR USA, INC., No. C041861 (Cal. 3d App. Dist.
February 27, 2004)
In a tort suit against the manufacturer of allegedly defective
ski-lift machinery, trial court erred in excluding evidence of
Cal-OSHA rules and regulations; under amended Labor Code section
6304.5, evidence of Cal-OSHA standards is admissible to establish
negligence per se except against the state for violation of a
mandatory duty. Trial court abused its discretion in awarding
defendant expert witness fees as costs.

To read the full text of this opinion, go to:
http://login.findlaw.com/scripts/callaw?dest=ca/caapp4th/slip/2004/c041861.html
[PDF File]
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data2/californiastatecases/c041861.pdf

========================================================================
 

Direct Link To California Court Self Help Center | Litigation And Court Forms Main Room |
The Answer Main Room  | The Answer Table of Contents  | CaliforniaCivilProcedure.Com Table of Contents 
California  Code of  Civil Procedure-Table of Contents | California Judicial Council Forms - Contract 
California Judicial Council Forms -Personal Injury | Judicial Council forms -Directory of Forms

_________________________
Have a BEAUTIFUL  DAY!!!!!

Copyright 2000  ™© CaliforniaCivilProcedure.Com™©