(United States Supreme Court) - On a question of civil procedure, held that a third-party counterclaim defendant -- that is, a party brought into a lawsuit through a counterclaim filed by the original defendant -- may not remove a class-action counterclaim from state court to federal court. Justice Thomas, joined by the four liberal justices, delivered the opinion of a 5-4 Court in this debt collection lawsuit.

(United States Ninth Circuit) - Held that a car purchaser did not raise a triable issue that a dealership failed to provide customers promised add-ons. Also addressed an issue under the Class Action Fairness Act relating to removal jurisdiction. Affirmed the decision below.

(United States Ninth Circuit) - Held that an engineering company could not proceed with a class action lawsuit alleging that its former concrete supplier unlawfully recorded cellular phone users' calls without their consent. Affirmed an order decertifying the class on the ground that the class representative lacked individual standing.

(United States Ninth Circuit) - In an en-banc decision, affirmed the approval of a class action settlement in a multidistrict litigation brought against two automobile manufacturers, which had been accused of making misrepresentations about their vehicles' fuel economy. Also upheld attorney fee awards, rejecting objectors' challenges.

(United States Second Circuit) - Affirmed. Plaintiff brought class action suit against Defendant, Coca-Cola Company alleging misleading naming and marketing of “Diet Coke”. District court dismissed all claims under Federal Rule 12(b)(6). Appeals court that the adjective “diet” referred to caloric content and carries a relative meaning and not an absolute meaning.

(United States Ninth Circuit) - Affirmed. The district court's refusal to compel arbitration was upheld, as was their refusal of several motions by Rent-A-Center attempting to avoid class action against them because a contract to waive the right to seek public injunctive relief violates California law.

(United States DC Circuit) - Reversed and Remanded. The district court improperly dismissed a lawsuit in which a woman's credit card number and expiration date were printed on a receipt for lack of standing. The risk of identity theft was sufficient injury to support standing.

(California Court of Appeal) - Affirmed. Plaintiff brought a class action against Defendant alleging Insurance Code violations and unfair business practices for the insurance rates Defendant charged in its car rental business. The trial court found no illegal or fraudulent business practice or any economic injury. Judgment was entered in favor of the Defendant.

(United States Second Circuit) - Partially affirmed, partially reversed. A class action suit against energy providers was dismissed and a post-judgment request for leave to amend was refused. Plaintiffs should have been allowed to amend their complaint and their proposed amended complaint stated plausible claims.

(Supreme Court of California) - Reversed. The trial court and the court of appeals denied class action certification to Plaintiff who sought to bring an action against retailers who allegedly misled buyers about the size of an inflatable outdoor pool. The Supreme court concluded that the trial court erred in demanding evidence about the ascertainability requirement for class certification, holding that there is not an additional evidentiary burden that the courts below imposed.

(United States Second Circuit) - Questions on appeal concern cross-jurisdictional tolling of a class action. Because the appeal presents state law questions that New York’s courts have yet to address, the court certifies the case to the New York Court of Appeals.

(United States Ninth Circuit) - Reversed and remanded. The panel held that the defendants’ jurisdictional allegations, which provided a short and plain statement of the parties’ citizenship based on information and belief, satisfied the defendants’ burden of pleading minimal diversity pursuant to the Class Action Fairness Act.

(United States Fifth Circuit) - Affirmed. The magistrate judge and district court properly denied the claims of a group of fishermen to a portion of the punitive damages settlement granted to a class of claimants alleging harm as a result of the Deepwater Horizon oil spill because the court was bound to precedent, the plain language of the settlement, and a deferential standard of review.

(United States DC Circuit) - Affirmed. The denial of class certification in the case of thousands of shippers allegedly harmed by a price fixing conspiracy among freight railroads was affirmed because their evidence for proving causation, injury, and damages on a class wide basis measured negative damages for over 2,000 members.

(United States Ninth Circuit) - Affirmed in part, reversed in part. Minor league baseball players seeking class status in an action under the Fair Labor Standards Act appeal the denial of class certification in Arizona and Florida. The panel held certification is appropriate and consistent with “the great public policy” embodied by the FLSA.

(United States Seventh Circuit) - Reversed. The court reversed the dismissal of a class action consumer fraud and deceptive business case involving cat food labeled prescription cat food that was not materially different from regular cat food. The fraud claim was sufficiently pled and the Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act's safe harbor didn't apply.

(Supreme Court of California) - Affirmed a man's death sentence for robbing and murdering an elderly couple, on an automatic appeal.

(Supreme Court of California) - Held that a shoplifting juvenile did not violate a California law that prohibits the possession of certain physical tools that can be used for burglary. He contended that the statute does not cover pliers for removing anti-security tags. Finding merit in his argument, the California Supreme Court clarified the requisite intent to trigger criminal liability under the burglary tool possession statute.

(Supreme Court of California) - Held that an indigent defendant facing misdemeanor charges was constitutionally entitled to the help of appointed counsel on the prosecution's appeal. She had successfully moved to suppress evidence related to driving under the influence. The California Supreme Court agreed with her that she had the right to appointed counsel on the prosecution's appeal of the suppression order.

(Supreme Court of California) - Upheld a San Francisco ordinance that requires wireless phone service companies to obtain permits and conform with aesthetic guidelines when installing lines and equipment on utility poles. The companies sought a declaratory judgment that the ordinance is inconsistent with state law. However, the California Supreme Court was not persuaded by the companies' arguments.

(Supreme Court of California) - Affirmed that the double-jeopardy rule barred the defendant from being retried for first-degree murder. The prosecution insisted that he could be retried because the U.S. Supreme Court's decision in Blueford v. Arkansas, 566 U.S. 599 (2012) has abrogated Stone v. Superior Court, 31 Cal. 3d 503 (1982), with regard to double-jeopardy principles involving partial verdicts. However, the California Supreme Court disagreed.

(Supreme Court of California) - Addressed the retroactivity of Proposition 47. Held that a defendant who had not yet been sentenced as of the 2014 measure's effective date was entitled to initial sentencing under its amended penalty provisions, without regard to the resentencing procedures applicable to those who were already serving their sentences.

(Supreme Court of California) - Held that baseball stadium security guards did not need to submit their wage claims to arbitration. The issue involved whether the claims turned on the meaning of their collective-bargaining agreement. Answering no, the California Supreme Court held that the security guards could proceed in state court.

(Supreme Court of California) - On an automatic appeal, affirmed a man's capital murder conviction for killing a woman and her daughter.

(Supreme Court of California) - Affirmed a death judgment imposed on a man who robbed a convenience store and fatally shot the clerk.

(Supreme Court of California) - Interpreting Code of Civil Procedure section 580d, the California Supreme Court held that a creditor holding two deeds of trust on the same property may recover a deficiency judgment on the junior lien extinguished by a nonjudicial foreclosure sale on the senior lien.

(Supreme Court of California) - Interpreting the state's anti-SLAPP statute, the California Supreme Court addressed whether the commercial nature of a defendant's speech is relevant in determining whether that speech merits protection. Reversing, the high court concluded that the anti-SLAPP statute was inapplicable here to a dispute between two companies over what one said about the other's business practices.

(Supreme Court of California) - Modified a sentence imposed in a capital murder case, on an automatic appeal.

(Supreme Court of California) - On an automatic appeal, affirmed a death judgment imposed for the first-degree murders of two people.

(Supreme Court of California) - On an automatic appeal, affirmed a death judgment imposed on a man who murdered a peace officer.

(Supreme Court of California) - Held that courts may impose release conditions on persons who post bail. A defendant who posted bail contended that it was improper to require her to also agree to submit to warrantless searches. However, the California Supreme Court concluded that a trial court does have authority to impose reasonable conditions related to public safety.

(Supreme Court of California) - Clarified the procedure for challenging a local governmental agency's decision to impose or increase property-related fees. The question in this case involving a wastewater service charge had to do with whether the plaintiff must first raise the issue when the agency holds a public hearing on the matter.

(Supreme Court of California) - Held that businesses may not recover compensation for purely economic losses suffered from mere proximity to an industrial accident (a massive, months-long leak from a natural gas storage facility). Negligence law did not provide them a remedy for income lost because of the leak, in this case where they alleged no property damage or personal injury.

(Supreme Court of California) - Clarified how California Code of Civil Procedure section 998 (relating to pretrial settlement offers) is used in arbitration. Held a request for costs under that provision is timely if filed with the arbitrator within 15 days of a final award. In response to such a request, an arbitrator has authority to award costs to the offering party. However, if an arbitrator refuses to award costs, judicial review is limited.

(Supreme Court of California) - Clarified the procedure that must be followed by a prison inmate who wishes to preserve evidence for a youth offender parole hearing, which is a special proceeding held during the 25th year of incarceration for certain juveniles sentenced as adults. The preserved evidence can concern their characteristics and circumstances at the time of the offense.

(Supreme Court of California) - Addressed the effect of Proposition 47 on a conviction for street terrorism. Held that once the defendant's conviction for grand theft (stealing a bicycle) was reduced to a misdemeanor under the new law, his conviction for the gang crime of street terrorism must be dismissed, because there was no longer a felony predicate for it.

(Supreme Court of California) - On an automatic appeal, affirmed a death sentence imposed on a woman for killing three of her children.

(Supreme Court of California) - Held that it is constitutional for San Francisco to impose a tax on drivers who park their cars in paid parking lots, even when the parking lot is operated by a state university.

(Supreme Court of California) - Automatic death penalty appeal. Defendant convicted of multiple murders and special enhancements applied. Appeals court affirmed judgment in all respects.

(Supreme Court of California) - Reversed as to attempted murder conviction. Defendant was tried and convicted of first degree murder and two attempted murders. The trial court instructed the jury on the attempted murder using the kill zone theory, which allows for the conviction of attempted murder of an individual who was not the primary target. California Supreme Court held that the jury was not properly instructed and reversed the attempted murder conviction.

(Supreme Court of California) - Affirmed. Automatic death penalty appeal. Defendant convicted of first degree murder with the special circumstances for rape. Jury returned a verdict of death and the court imposed that sentence.

(Supreme Court of California) - Automatic appeal of death penalty conviction and sentence. Affirmed conviction and sentence.

(Supreme Court of California) - Reversed. Plaintiffs are state correctional employees who sought additional compensation for pre and postwork activities that include walking from outermost gate of prison to their work posts. The court divided Plaintiffs into two groups: union and non-union. The appeals court held that the non-union employees were entitled to overtime. The California Supreme Court held the union employees were not entitled to additional compensation because their collective bargaining agreement took that into account. And the non-union were not entitled because the walking time did not fit the definition of compensable work time under the Pay Scale Manual.

(Supreme Court of California) - Affirmed. The Appeals court held that the current policy of the California Department of Social Services treating court-ordered child support as income and using the same funds twice as income for both the paying household and the receiving household does not violate the Welfare and Institutions Code section 11005.5.

(Supreme Court of California) - Reversed appeal court ruling. The parties entered into a confidential settlement agreement following a tort action. Plaintiff alleged that Defendant, counsel for the injured party in the tort action, breached the settlement agreement by making public statements. Defendant claimed he was not bound by the agreement, but only recommended his clients sign it. California Supreme Court made a factual finding that the Defendant intended to be bound by the settlement agreement.

(Supreme Court of California) - Reversed and remanded. The Government Claims Act immunity for public entities is an affirmative defense that can be waived or forfeited if not timely raised.

(Supreme Court of California) - Writ of habeas corpus is granted. Death sentence vacated on grounds that false testimony was given at trial.

(Supreme Court of California) - Vacate order and remand. The trial court denied Plaintiff access to ballistics evidence used at his trial to file a habeas corpus petition. The trial court believed that Penal Code section 1054.9 prohibited such a release of evidence. The Supreme court disagreed stating that section 1054.9 referred to physical evidence held by the prosecutor, not evidence held by the court.

(Supreme Court of California) - Reversed. Plaintiffs brought a tort action against Defendants for a fatal tour bus accident that occurred in Arizona. The parties originally included plaintiffs from China and defendants from Indiana and California. The trial court determined that Indiana law governed the suit. Before trial a settlement was reached with the Indiana defendant. A Motion in Limine was brought to reconsider the choice of law because of the settlement. The Supreme Court held that a settlement did not require the trial to reconsider the choice of law.

(Supreme Court of California) - Affirmed in part and reversed in part. Plaintiff filed suit for employment discrimination, retaliation and defamation. Defendant filed an anti—SLAPP motion, Code of Civil Procedure section 425.16. The Supreme court held that the anti-SLAPP statute is applicable to the claims of discrimination and retaliation, but not to the defamation cause of action because it was not made in connection with any issue of public significance.