
Here are a few cases I did not have time to write up but seemed either important or irritating enough to mention:
Bad guy appealed your fee award? Remember to cross-appeal! Court not only affirmed respondent’s fees, but concluded trial court should have awarded more. BUT: No cross-appeal, so the reduced award stands. Papageorges v. Dana Point Harbor Partners, LLC (D4d3, June 20, 2025, No. G063688) (non-pub. opn.)
Nice 998 theory, but rejected: One of five co-defendants hit with $200k personal injury verdict argued its 998 offer of $75k easily beat its one-fifth share of the judgement. Nope, says Court of Appeal. The judgment is joint and several. JBS CARRIERS, INC., v. MICHAEL MENDOZA, et al., (D4d1, June 23, 2025, No. D083415) (non-pub. opn.)
No clear explanation for 80% fee “haircut” required reversal. ASHLEY TIDRICK v. FCA US LLC, (D2d3, June 26, 2025, No. G063186) (non-pub. opn.)
Supreme Court limits non-signatory arbitration. Ford could use buyer/dealer arb clause to compel arb of defect claims. Plaintiffs seeking to avoid arb: make sure your claims are “not intimately founded in or intertwined with” the arb contract. Ford Motor Warranty Cases (Cal., July 3, 2025, No. S279969)
(Artwork by Randall Holbrook, RNDL.DESIGN.)