Our Amicus Committee works hard on behalf of ASCDC members, submitting multiple amicus curiae briefs and letters each year in cases pending in state and federal courts. The Committee supports selected petitions seeking California Supreme Court review, and identifies appropriate cases in which to request publication of unpublished California appellate opinions that are of interest to our members.

If you have a matter that you wish to bring to the attention of the Amicus Committee, please contact the Chair, Steven Fleischman at Horvitz & Levy, (818) 995-0800 or sfleischman@horvitzlevy.com.

Below are links to briefs and letters the Committee has filed since 2000, compiled in a searchable database.


Showing page 4 of 39: Total Records: 191

Oh et al. v. Teacher Insurance and Annuity Association of America et al.
(2020)
Opinion certified for publicationcase no. B297567case no. S264314
8/6/2020
Request for Publication
T.B. et al., as Coconservators, etc., v O.B., Objector and Appellant
(2020)
Supreme Court OpinionOpinion Certified for Publicationcase no. B290805case no. S254938
If you are defending against a claim involving the "clear and convincing" standard of proof, read this Opinion. Although this was a conservatorship case, the Supreme Courts analysis encompasses all claims involving this standard, such as punitive damages claims, Elder Abuse cases, decisions terminating parental rights, and the actual malice standard for certain defamation cases. If you have trial court or appellate briefing addressing this standard, youll likely need to update your citations and analysis. The Supreme Court disapproves of language in numerous cases and secondary authorities, including Witkin, and approves of other language.
9/6/2019
Amicus Curiae Brief Supporting Defendant
Abdulkadhim v. Wu
(2020)
Opinion certified for publicationcase no. B298091
Involves the sudden emergency doctrine which shields defendants from liability in negligence actions where, despite exercising reasonable care, the defendant suddenly and unexpectedly faces an emergency that he/she did not cause and the plaintiff claims the defendant could have avoided the accident.
8/7/2020
Request for Publication
Arnold v. Dignity Health et al.
(2020)
Opinion certified for publicationcase no. C087465
The Court of Appeal affirmed the granting of summary judgment in a FEHA retaliation case.
8/6/2020
Request for Publication
Savaikie et al. v. Ralph Steger et al.
(2020)
Opinion certified for publicationcase no. B291120
Addresses the type of evidence necessary to create a triable issue that the employer "required" the employee to commute in his personal vehicle. Also questions whether the "incidental benefit" test is truly an independent test. This opinion concludes that the incidental benefit language should not be construed so broadly and that the case law shows it is really meant to apply only where there may not have been an express or implied requirement but there essentially was an agreement between the parties about using the car.
7/13/2020
Request for Publication
< 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10  >> 39 >