Case Summaries
Contracts
Tax Law
Commercial Law
International Law
Contracts
[10/09]
Pacific Sunwear of California, Inc. v. Oleas Enter., Inc.
In a breach of warranty lawsuit brought by plaintiff-clothing retailer, grant of summary judgment in favor of defendant is reversed where: 1) the trial court's interpretation of rightful claim was erroneous; 2) a rightful claim under section 2312(3) is a nonfrivolous claim of infringement that has any significant and adverse effect on the buyer's ability to make use of the purchased goods; and 3) under this standard, the trial court could not properly concluded, as a matter of law, that the third party infringement claim against plaintiff was not a rightful claim.
[10/08]
Motorola Inc. v. Amkor Tech., Inc.
In a suit over the terms of a patent license agreement (PLA) between plaintiff and a third party, affecting the transfer of an interest in the patents to defendant, judgment for defendant is affirmed where: 1) defendant was not judicially estopped from changing its argument during trial about the relationship between two sections of the PLA; 2) the "law of the case" did not prevent defendant from changing its arguments on an earlier remand; and 3) there was sufficient evidence to support the trial court's findings of fact.
[08/29]
Kerlin v. Sauceda
In a suit alleging that defendant defrauded plaintiffs of oil and gas royalties and other interests in Padre Island, judgments for plaintiffs are reversed as time-barred where: 1) plaintiffs could have discovered defendant's wrongdoing through reasonable diligence and were not entitled to tolling of the running of limitations on that basis; and 2) defendant was present in the state, by virtue of doing business there, during all of the alleged wrongdoing, and statutory tolling therefore did not apply. (Revised opinion)
More...
Tax Law
[10/10]
Wagner v. US
In a claim for the return of funds allegedly wrongfully levied by the government, summary judgment for defendant is vacated and suit is dismissed for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction where there was no basis for jurisdiction under the Internal Revenue Code sections permitting claims for wrongful levy or substitution of value, or as a general third-party refund action.
[10/08]
Jefferson v. US
In a suit to recover back payroll taxes for a day-care center which were assessed personally against plaintiff-director, summary judgment for defendant is affirmed where: 1) plaintiff was a "responsible person"; 2) plaintiff willfully failed to pay the day care's taxes; 3) plaintiff was not exempt from the trust fund recovery penalty; 4) defendant was not estopped from assessing the tax against plaintiff; and 5) defendant's failure to turn over evidence did not preclude summary judgment.
[09/29]
Palahnuk v. Comm'r of Internal Revenue
Respondent's determination of a tax deficiency on petitioners' 2001 federal income tax return is affirmed where: 1) the rules governing the calculation of net operating loss for regular income tax purposes also apply to the alternative tax net operating loss except where otherwise indicated; 2) sections 172(c) and (d) of the Internal Revenue Code effectively preclude net capital losses from inclusion in net operating loss, and section 1211(b) limits capital loss deductions to $3000 per year; and 3) nothing in section 56(d) of the I.R.C. alters the rules for calculating net operating losses such that petitioners may include net capital losses in the calculation of the alternative tax net operating loss.
More...
Commercial Law
[10/08]
Structural Polymer Group, Ltd. v. Zoltek Corp.
In appeals arising following a jury's award in lost profits from defendant for breach of a requirements contract for the sale of carbon fiber, denial of defendant's motion for a new trial and motion for judgment as a matter of law are affirmed over claims that the district court erred: 1) by refusing to allow it to raise two arguments to the jury; 2) in ruling that defendant failed to make a submissible case that SP had abandoned the Supply Agreement; 3) by failing to remedy unfairly prejudicial testimony at trial; and 4) in various respects with regards to damages issues. However, modification of the jury award to reduce it by almost $16 million is affirmed on cross-appeal where the district court properly found the award duplicative.
[10/08]
Noble Sys. Corp. v. Alorica Cent., LLC
In an action against defendants for tortious interference with a business relationship, fraud and intentional and negligent misrepresentation, conversion, unjust enrichment, and conspiracy to defraud plaintiff and convert its property, rulings against plaintiff are affirmed where: 1) grant of defendant's motion to take judicial notice of a financing statement it filed was not error; 2) one tortious interference claim failed as the allegations did not show that the defendant acted without justification, and the other claim was properly dismissed; 3) fraud and intentional and negligent misrepresentation claims were meritless; 4) conversion and replevin claims failed as plaintiff possessed no property interest that it could enforce against defendants; and 5) civil conspiracy and unjust enrichment claims failed as there was no requisite underlying fraud, conversion or tort supporting such claims.
[10/01]
In re Heritage Bond Litig.
In a challenge to the scope of bar orders issued in securities class action settlements, bar orders forbidding all suits by non-settling defendant against settling defendants relating to or arising out of the class action are vacated as overly broad and remanded for modification because bar orders issued pursuant to Private Securities Litigation Reform Act section 4(f)(7)(A) or California Code of Civil Procedure section 877.6 can only bar claims for contribution, indemnity, and claims where the injury is the non-settling defendant's liability to the class action plaintiffs.
More...
International Law
[10/08]
Salmon Spawning & Recovery Alliance v. Gutierrez
In a challenge by conservation groups to the U.S. being part of a treaty allegedly allowing Canadian overharvesting of salmon covered by the Endangered Species Act (ESA), dismissal of two claims for lack of standing is affirmed, but dismissal of a third is reversed where: 1) plaintiffs' substantive challenge to National Marine Wildlife Service's (NMWS) biological opinion prior to U.S. entrance into the treaty, and their challenge to continued implementation of the treaty lacked redressability because the Court cannot affect U.S. entrance into or withdrawal from a treaty; but 2) plaintiffs did establish associational standing on their claim of procedural failure by the NMWS to reinitiate consultation, under section 7 of the ESA, on the biological opinion issued due to new information regarding actual salmon takes and effects on the population.
[10/08]
Delgado v. Mukasey
Petition for review of denial of applications for asylum, withholding of removal, and withholding under the Convention Against Torture are dismissed in part and denied in part where: 1) the Board of Immigration Appeals may determine by adjudication that a crime is "particularly serious" without it being so classified by regulation; 2) the Court lacks jurisdiction to review the merits of such decisions; and 3) petitioner did not prove a likelihood of future torture if returned to El Salvador.
[09/29]
Safety Nat'l Cas. Corp. v. Certain Underwriters at Lloyd's, London
In a contract dispute between three insurers, denial of a motion to compel arbitration is reversed where the McCarran-Ferguson Act did not cause a state statute voiding arbitration agreements in insurance contracts to reverse-preempt the Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards. (Revised opinion)
More...
|
