Case Summaries
Commercial Law
[11/18] Surrey v. TrueBeginnings
In a case of first impression in California involving an online matchmaking service, someone who presents him or herself to a business with the intent of purchasing its services or products, but becomes aware of that business's practice of charging different amounts for such services or products based on gender and thereafter does not purchase those services or products, is not aggrieved by that practice so as to have standing to sue for violations of the Unruh Act and the Gender Tax Repeal Act. The court adopts a bright-line rule that a person must tender the purchase price for a business's services or products in order to have standing to sue it for alleged discriminatory practices relating thereto.
[11/14] Cadles of Grassy Meadows II, LLC v. Goldner
Petition for panel rehearing granted, prior opinion withdrawn, and matter remanded for further proceedings in light of Kerlin v. Sauceda, 05-0653 (Tex. October 10, 2008).
[07/29] Fed. Trade Comm'n v. Whole Foods Market, Inc.
Denial of the FTC's request for a preliminary injunction against the merger of the Whole Foods and Wild Oats supermarket chains is reversed and remanded where: 1) the case was not moot despite the merger's having already occurred; 2) the district court did not abuse its discretion by considering the market definition proposed by the FTC, in which Whole Foods and Wild Oats compete in the "premium, natural, and organic supermarkets" (PNOS) market, not against all supermarkets; 3) the FTC met the threshold requirements for obtaining a preliminary injunction by demonstrating a likelihood of success on its claim that the two supermarkets did compete in the PNOS market; and 4) the district court was best positioned to balance the FTC's showing against the equities weighing against an injunction. (Amended and reissued opinion)
More...
Injury & Tort Law
[11/21] McGhee v. Pottawattamie County, Iowa
In suits by two men convicted for murder and released over twenty years later, alleging constitutional violations by the original prosecutors and defamation by the current prosecutor, orders of the district court are affirmed in part and reversed in part where: 1) defendant-current prosecutor was entitled to sovereign immunity on the defamation claim; and 2) with respect to defendants-original prosecutors, the district court erred in failing to conduct an analysis of the scope of their employment for sovereign immunity purposes distinct from the court's analysis of whether they were entitled to absolute immunity.
[11/21] Dale v. Poston
In a federal prisoner's suit alleging Eighth Amendment violations by prison employees who allegedly failed to protect him from an attack by another inmate, summary judgment for defendants is affirmed where there was no evidence that any of the defendants were aware of facts from which they could draw an inference of substantial harm.
[11/19] Bregin v. Liquidebt Sys., Inc
In a suit alleging retaliatory discharge and tortious interference with employment, summary judgment for defendants is affirmed where: 1) plaintiff did not identify any illegal acts which he was asked to commit, for which a retaliation claim could be brought; 2) state law did not provide a whistleblower exception to the employment-at-will doctrine; and 3) plaintiff did not make out a claim for tortious interference.
More...
|
