I've updated my list of pending California Supreme Court cases relevant to the areas of practice covered by this blog.
The only new cases added to the list are five more "grant and holds" involving arbitration issues and stayed pending resolution of Sanchez or Iskanian. Removing all the "grant and hold" cases from the list, here's what's pending. (If I've missed any, please drop me an email.)
There are two class certification cases (Ayala and Duran); three arbitration-related cases (Sonic-Calabasas, Sanchez, and Iskanian); one preemption case (Pac Anchor); and one "unfair" prong case (Cipro):
Ayala v. Antelope Valley Newspapers, No. S206874 (review granted 01/30/13)
- Issue: This case presents questions concerning the determination of whether common issues predominate in a proposed class action relating to claims that turn on whether members of the putative class are independent contractors or employees.
- Court of Appeal Opinion: Ayala v. Antelope Valley Newspapers, Inc., 210 Cal.App.4th 77 (2012)
Iskanian v. CLS Transportation, No. S204032 (review granted 09/19/12)
- Issues: (1) Did AT&T Mobility LLC v. Concepcion (2011) 563 U.S. __ [131 S. Ct. 1740, 179 L.Ed.2d 742] impliedly overrule Gentry v. Superior Court (2007) 42 Cal.4th 443 with respect to contractual class action waivers in the context of non-waivable labor law rights? (2) Does the high court's decision permit arbitration agreements to override the statutory right to bring representative claims under the Labor Code Private Attorneys General Act of 2004 (Lab. Code, § 2698 et seq.)? (3) Did defendant waive its right to compel arbitration?
- Court of Appeal Opinion: Iskanian v. CLS Transp. Los Angeles, LLC, 206 Cal.App.4th 949 (2012)
Duran v. U.S. Bank National Association, no. S200923 (review granted 05/16/12)
- Issue: This case presents issues concerning the certification of class actions in wage and hour misclassification litigation and the use of representative testimony and statistical evidence at trial of such a class action.
- Court of Appeal Opinion: Duran v. U.S. Bank National Ass'n., 203 Cal.App.4th 212 (2012)
- Briefs: available at this link
Sanchez v. Valencia Holding Co., no. S199119 (review granted 03/21/12)
- Issue: Does the Federal Arbitration Act (9 U.S.C. § 2), as interpreted in AT&T Mobility LLC v. Concepcion (2011) 563 U. S. __, 131 S.Ct. 1740, preempt state law rules invalidating mandatory arbitration provisions in a consumer contract as procedurally and substantively unconscionable?
- Court of Appeal Opinion: Sanchez v. Valencia Holding Co., LLC, 201 Cal.App.4th 74 (2011)
- Issue: May a suit under the Cartwright Antitrust Act (Bus. & Prof. Code, § 16720 et seq.) be brought to challenge "reverse exclusionary payments" made by pharmaceutical manufacturers to settle patent litigation with generic drug producers and prolong the life of the patents in question?
- Court of Appeal Opinion: In re Cipro Cases I & II, 200 Cal.App.4th 442 (2011)
People ex rel. Harris v. Pac Anchor Transportation, Inc., no. S194388 (review granted 08/10/11)
- Issue: Is an action under the Unfair Competition Law (Bus. & Prof. Code, § 17200 et seq.) that is based on a trucking company's alleged violation of state labor and insurance laws "related to the price, route, or service" of the company and, therefore, preempted by the Federal Aviation Administration Authorization Act of 1994 (49 U.S.C. § 14501)?
- Court of Appeal Opinion: People ex rel. Harris v. Pac Anchor Transportation, Inc., 195 Cal.App.4th 765 (May 18, 2011)
- Issues: (1) Can a mandatory employment arbitration agreement be enforced prior to the conclusion of an administrative proceeding conducted by the Labor Commissioner concerning an employee's statutory wage claim? (2) Was the Labor Commissioner's jurisdiction over employee's statutory wage claim divested by the Federal Arbitration Act under Preston v. Ferrer (2008) __ U.S. __, 128 S.Ct. 978, 169 L.Ed.2d 917?
- Supreme Court Opinion: Sonic-Calabasas A, Inc. v. Moren0, 59 Cal.4th (Feb. 24, 2011)
- U.S. Supreme Court Order (10/31/11): The petition for writ of certiorari is granted. The judgment is vacated, and the case is remanded to the Supreme Court of California for further consideration in light of AT&T Mobility LLC v. Concepcion, 563 U.S. ___ (Apr. 27, 2011).
- Supreme Court Order (01/11/12): In light of the United States Supreme Court's order vacating our judgment in the above-entitled case and remanding the cause to this court "for further consideration in light of AT&T Mobility LLC. v. Concepcion, 563 U.S. __ (2011) [131 S.Ct. 1740]," the parties are requested to brief the significance of that case. The parties are requested to file and serve simultaneous briefs by February 10, 2012, and may file and serve reply briefs by February 24, 2012.