Environmental Health Advocates v. Pancho Villa’s Horst Legal Counsel | February 2026 California businesses that sell consumer products know the rhythm: a Proposition 65 notice arrives, the 60-day clock starts, and the company has to decide whether to settle, fix the alleged exposure, or prepare for litigation. For years, defendants have fought back by scrutinizing every line of the pre-suit …
California Court Strikes Down Forum Selection Clause in Consumer Warranty:
What Diaz v. Thor Motor Coach Means for Your Contracts Horst Legal Counsel | February 2026 Picture this: you buy a motorhome from a California dealer. A few months in, serious defects start showing up. The manufacturer won’t fix them. So you do what you’re supposed to do — you hire an attorney and file suit in California to enforce …
Grant v. Chapman University:
Marketing “Face-to-Face” Experience Does Not Create Enforceable Contract for In-Person Classes When operations get disrupted, customers look for refunds. Students are no different. During COVID-era campus closures, many sued universities for tuition back based on an “implied promise” of in-person education. This California Court of Appeal just rejected this effort in a case involving Chapman University, finding that Chapman had …
Fuentes v. Empire Nissan: California Arbitration Agreement Enforceability Turns on Readability and Ordinary Contract Rules
California arbitration enforceability fights are increasingly won or lost on something that sounds almost too basic to matter: could the employee reasonably read what they were asked to sign, and do the surrounding circumstances show meaningful assent? Fuentes v. Empire Nissan, Inc. is the Supreme Court’s clearest reminder that formatting and onboarding process are not side issues—they can shape the …
When State Law Caps Penalties, Cities Can’t Add “Impoundment” as a Workaround: Mustaqeem v. City of San Diego
California’s sidewalk vending statutes reflect a legislative tradeoff: local governments may regulate through objective health and safety rules, but enforcement is meant to stay within a deliberately narrow set of tools. Mustaqeem v. City of San Diego underscores what that bargain looks like in litigation. The decision is less about sidewalk vending in isolation and more about a familiar public-law …
Hu v. XPO Logistics: Court of Appeal offers a roadmap for defending California “broker-as-carrier” negligence claims
In serious-accident litigation arising out of contractor-heavy supply chains, plaintiffs rarely stop with the driver and the motor carrier. They look upstream—often at a broker, platform, or logistics intermediary—and try to reframe that entity as the party that actually controlled the work. Hu v. XPO Logistics, LLC is a helpful company-side decision because it keeps the inquiry grounded: the Court …
Tuufuli v. West Coast Dental Administrative Services: If You Want Federal Arbitration Act Enforcement, Just Say So
Employment and commercial agreements often treat the governing-law paragraph as boilerplate—something copied, pasted, and rarely revisited. Tuufuli is a reminder that, at least in the arbitration context, a few carefully chosen words can do real work. If an arbitration agreement expressly states that it is governed by the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA), a California Court of Appeal may enforce that …
California Specific Personal Jurisdiction After Ford Motor: Climate Litigation Comes for the “Middleman”
California’s latest climate decision, In re Fuel Industry Climate Cases, pushes the law of specific personal jurisdiction another step forward—and national businesses that sell, brand, or market into the state should pay attention. The First District Court of Appeal held that California courts can exercise specific jurisdiction over Citgo Petroleum, an out-of-state company, based on decades of branded gasoline …







