Case Summaries
Commercial Law
[12/11] Falcone v. J.T. Harris, Inc.
In a breach of contract dispute, a claim was made that the waterproofing contractor was negligence in his process. The jury awarded the defendant.
[08/04] Liberty Mut. Ins. Co. v. Greenwich Ins. Co.
In a commercial dispute concerning a claim made on a surety bond issued by one insurer to another, recovery on the bond in favor of plaintiff is affirmed.
[07/27] Timber Prod. Co. v. US
In a case concerning the proper tariff classification of plywood, judgment in favor of the Government is vacated where the trial court misapplied the test for determining whether a tariff term has an established commercial meaning different from its common meaning.
[08/04] Sikirica v. Nationwide Ins. Co.
A writ of summons alone cannot be the "initial pleading" that triggers the 30-day period for removal under 28 U.S.C. section 1445(b).
[08/04] Inco Dev. Corp. v. Super. Ct. of San Bernardino County
The tolling provision contained in Code of Civil Procedure section 356 does not apply to extend the 10-year period set forth in section 337.15, which covers actions based on latent construction defects.
[08/02] Trend Homes, Inc. v. Super. Ct. of Fresno
A provision found in home purchase contracts, which requires homebuyers who sue the builders of the homes to submit the dispute to judicial reference, is enforceable.
[08/02] Lillien v. Peak6 Investments
In an employment dispute, summary judgment in favor of defendant-employer is affirmed where plaintiff has not created a triable issue of fact on his claim that defendant had a contractual duty to pay him a pro-rated share of a year end bonus.
[08/04] Sikirica v. Nationwide Ins. Co.
A writ of summons alone cannot be the "initial pleading" that triggers the 30-day period for removal under 28 U.S.C. section 1445(b).
[08/04] Liberty Mut. Ins. Co. v. Greenwich Ins. Co.
In a commercial dispute concerning a claim made on a surety bond issued by one insurer to another, recovery on the bond in favor of plaintiff is affirmed.
[08/02] City of King City v. Cmty. Bank of Cent. Cal.
In a suit by plaintiff-city to recover funds pledged as collateral for a loan, judgment in favor of plaintiff is reversed where the trial court committed prejudicial error when it denied defendant-bank's request for delay to conduct discovery and categorically excluded testimony concerning the events at issue.
[07/28] Phipps v. FDIC
Plaintiff's claim, alleging that defendant-bank violated Missouri's Second Mortgage Loan Act by charging unlawful fees on second mortgage loans, was properly removed to federal court since federal statutes governing national banks create an exclusive cause of action against national banks for usury.
