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 …
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 …
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’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 …
When a city decides to tax streaming, the first reaction from many platforms is: you can’t really treat us like cable… can you? In Disney Platform Distribution v. City of Santa Barbara (B342211, Dec. 17, 2025, 2d Dist., Div. 6), the Court of Appeal said yes. It upheld Santa Barbara’s 5.75% video users tax as applied to Disney+, Hulu, and …
When a case gets dismissed as a discovery sanction, the first instinct for many litigants—and many lawyers—is to reach for Code of Civil Procedure section 473(b). The “mandatory relief” provision is often treated like a safety net: file an attorney affidavit of fault, and the court must undo the damage. But Rodriguez v. WNT, Inc. (Dec. 4, 2025, D084642) …