Aguilar v. Atlantic Richfield Co.
25 Cal.4th 826 (Cal. 2001) Cited 4,917 times 2 Legal AnalysesConcluding that the gathering and dissemination of pricing information by the petroleum companies through an independent industry service did not imply collusive action where there was no evidence the information was misused as a basis for an unlawful conspiracy; rather, evidence suggested that individual companies used all available resources “to determine capacity, supply, and pricing decisions which would maximize their own individual profits”
Waller v. Truck Ins. Exchange, Inc.
11 Cal.4th 1 (Cal. 1995) Cited 1,777 times 5 Legal AnalysesHolding that, when extrinsic facts eliminate the potential for coverage, an insurer may decline to defend even if the complaint had suggested potential liability
Abdallah v. United Savings Bank
43 Cal.App.4th 1101 (Cal. Ct. App. 1996) Cited 470 timesHolding that court did not err in declining to apportion fees given that contract and non-contract claims were "inextricably intertwined" and that it was "impracticable, if not impossible" to separate fees arising from each
Alki Partners, LP v. DB Fund Servs., LLC
4 Cal.App.5th 574 (Cal. Ct. App. 2016) Cited 143 timesNoting that indemnity agreements generally do not allow for the recovery of attorney fees incurred in an action for breach of contract between the parties to that agreement, but that an exception exists where the indemnity provision includes express language providing for attorneys' fees incurred in enforcing the agreement
FPI Development, Inc. v. Nakashima
231 Cal.App.3d 367 (Cal. Ct. App. 1991) Cited 288 times 4 Legal AnalysesAffirming summary judgment
Binder v. Aetna Life Ins. Co.
75 Cal.App.4th 832 (Cal. Ct. App. 1999) Cited 220 timesHolding that consent to a contract may be manifested by conduct
Pfeifer v. Countrywide Home Loans, Inc.
211 Cal.App.4th 1250 (Cal. Ct. App. 2012) Cited 132 timesRecognizing the fifth exception to the tender requirement
Brown Bark III, L.P. v. Haver
219 Cal.App.4th 809 (Cal. Ct. App. 2013) Cited 123 times 3 Legal AnalysesRecognizing allocation "generally is required when the same lawyer represents one party that is entitled to recover its attorney fees and another party that is not"
Barroso v. Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC
208 Cal.App.4th 1001 (Cal. Ct. App. 2012) Cited 89 timesHolding that the plaintiff could amend her cause of action for breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing because under the terms of the Modification Agreement, the defendant was obligated to modify plaintiff's loan documents
Cytodyn v. Amerimmune
160 Cal.App.4th 288 (Cal. Ct. App. 2008) Cited 83 timesEnumerating the required elements for a trade secret misappropriation claim
Section 437c - [Effective Until 1/1/2025] Motion for summary judgment
Cal. Code Civ. Proc. § 437c Cited 8,336 times 7 Legal AnalysesRuling on summary judgment motion must be based on "papers submitted" with the motion
Section 3 - Retroactive effect
Cal. Code Civ. Proc. § 3 Cited 615 timesStating same as to Code of Civil Procedure — which, as its name indicates, deals with procedure
Section 1010 - Requirements of notices; service of notices and other papers
Cal. Code Civ. Proc. § 1010 Cited 362 times 1 Legal AnalysesConcerning parties in default
Rule 3.1350 - Motion for summary judgment or summary adjudication
Cal. R. 3.1350 Cited 230 times(a) Definitions As used in this rule, (1) "Motion" refers to either a motion for summary judgment or a motion for summary adjudication. (2) "Material facts" are facts that relate to the cause of action, claim for damages, issue of duty, or affirmative defense that is the subject of the motion and that could make a difference in the disposition of the motion. (Subd (a) amended effective January 1, 2016.) (b) Motion for summary adjudication If made in the alternative, a motion for summary adjudication