Gagen, McCoy, McMahon, Koss, Markowitz & Fanucci
  • Home
  • About
  • Attorneys
    • Sumita Bhandari
    • Stephen T. Buehl
    • Rachel Margolis Chapman
    • C. Joseph Doherty III
    • Armand M. Estrada
    • Robert M. Fanucci
    • William E. Gagen Jr.
    • Barbara Duval Jewell
    • Charles A. Koss
    • Michael J. Markowitz
    • Aileen Rodriguez Mazanetz
    • Gregory L. McCoy
    • Daniel A. Muller
    • Sarah S. Nix
    • Elizabeth R. Weiss
  • Practice Areas
    • Business And Contract Law
    • Criminal Defense
    • Education Law
    • Intellectual Property
    • Land Use And Real Estate
    • Litigation
    • Tax Law
    • Trusts And Estate Planning
    • Winery And Vineyard Law
  • Developments of Interest
  • Blog
  • Contact
Select Page
New Cases of Interest – October 05, 2020
  1. Home
  2.  » 
  3. Developments of Interest
  4.  » New Cases of Interest – October 05, 2020

Williams v. 3620 W. 102nd Street, Inc. (2020) 53 Cal.App.5th 1087.

This was a petition to compel arbitration based on agreements in residential leases.  The court held that arbitration would not be compelled because arbitration resulted in a waiver of a procedural right in litigation, a pretrial jury waiver, which was invalid as contrary to public policy.  There have of course been cases before that identified the right to jury trial as a procedural right that could not be waived or modified prior to a dispute arising, but those had not been applied to arbitration until this case.  The court did note that this was a situation in which the Federal Arbitration Act did not apply.

Conyer v. Hula Media Services, LLC (2020) 53 Cal.App.5th 1189.  This is also an arbitration issue case with a former employee suing an employer under the FEHA.  In this case there was an employer action to compel arbitration pursuant to an arbitration clause that had not been in an employee handbook at the time the employee was hired but was added during his employment.  The court of appeal held that the arbitration clause was enforceable, because the employee had demonstrated his consent to the arbitration clause by signing an acknowledgment of the revised employee handbook which contained the arbitration provision.

Eisenberg Village Etc. v. Suffolk Construction Company, Inc. (2020) 53 Cal.App.5th 1201.  This was an action brought five years after the construction involved in the case alleging that the contractor had not been duly licensed at all times during performance of the construction and seeking disgorgement of the amounts paid to the contractor.  The trial court, as affirmed by the court of appeal, held that the claim was barred by the one year statute of limitations for penalties or forfeitures under CCP §340(a) and that that statute applied to disgorgement claims under Business and Professions Code §7031(d), and that the discovery rule did not apply.

Thurston v. Fairfield Collectibles of Georgia, LLC (2020) 53 Cal.App.5th 1231.  This was a motion involving personal jurisdiction with the issue being whether a Georgia company’s website was sufficient to create jurisdiction in California.  The court found that jurisdiction existed because purposeful availment was shown by the evidence that the Georgia company made enough sales to Californians through its website, from which this particular dispute arose, that it was the equivalent of a physical store in California and the company also sent a substantial number of contacts to California residents, the combination of which was sufficient to satisfy the minimum contacts rule.

Related Attorney(s):
Gregory L. McCoy

Practice Areas

  • Business And Contract Law
  • Criminal Defense
    • Drunk Driving Defense
    • Expungement
    • Juvenile Law
    • Sex Crimes
    • Violent Crimes
  • Education Law
  • Intellectual Property
  • Land Use And Real Estate
  • Litigation
  • Tax Law
  • Trusts And Estate Planning
    • Advance Health Care Directives
    • Financial Powers Of Attorney
    • Forms Of Property Ownership Between Spouses
      • Joint Tenancy Vs Community Property
      • Separate Property And Community Property
      • The Relationship Between Characterization Of Property, Marital Agreements And Estate Planning
      • Ways To Hold Title For Married Couples In California
    • Probate Procedures And Duties Of A Personal Representative
    • Revocable And Irrevocable Trusts
      • Guide For Transfer Of Assets To A Revocable Living Trust
      • Generation Skipping Transfer Tax Trusts (Dynasty Trusts)
      • Special Needs Trusts
      • The Revocable Living Trust
      • Trust Administration
    • Wills
  • Winery And Vineyard Law

Make An Appointment

To Speak With One Our Attorneys

Contact us today and find out how Gagen, McCoy, McMahon, Koss, Markowitz & Fanucci can assist you.

Call Us Now For Additional Information

To schedule an initial consultation, please call us at 925-837-0585. Our firm boasts decades of experience, and we are prepared to begin working for you.

The Law Offices Of Gagen, McCoy, McMahon, Koss, Markowitz & Fanucci 630 San Ramon Valley Blvd Suite 100 Danville, CA 94526

DANVILLE OFFICE

630 San Ramon Valley Blvd
Suite 100
Danville, CA 94526

Phone: 925-837-0585
Fax: 925-838-5985

Map & Directions
The Law Offices of Gagen, McCoy, McMahon, Koss, Markowitz & Fanucci The Offices at Stonebridge 1030 Main Street, Suite 212 St. Helena, CA 94574

ST. HELENA OFFICE

The Offices at Stonebridge
1030 Main Street, Suite 212
St. Helena, CA 94574

Phone: 707-963-0909
Fax: 707-963-5527

Map & Directions
Review Us
  • Follow
  • Follow

© 2021 Gagen, McCoy, McMahon, Koss, Markowitz & Fanucci. All Rights Reserved.

Disclaimer | Site Map | Privacy Policy | Business Development Solutions by FindLaw, part of Thomson Reuters