KF&C California Law Blog

May 7, 2024 | Business Litigation

Long-Arm Jurisdiction: Are Foreign Website Operators Subject to Personal Jurisdiction in California Federal Courts?

Long-Arm Jurisdiction: Are Foreign Website Operators Subject to Personal Jurisdiction in California Federal Courts?In a recent case, Doe v. WebGroup Czech Republic, A.S., the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit answered a question that is frequently asked by U.S. litigants: “Is a foreign defendant subject to personal jurisdiction in a U.S. federal court where the defendant operates a website directed at the U.S. market?” For the first time, the Ninth Circuit provided a pragmatic standard for a critical issue in a world of globalized e-commerce and cloud computing.
Read More

March 22, 2024 | Real Estate Litigation

Real Estate Rights Update: U.S. Supreme Court Declines to Review Challenge to Rent Stabilization Laws in New York

Real Estate Rights Update:  U.S. Supreme Court Declines to Review Challenge to Rent Stabilization Laws in New YorkThe United States Supreme Court recently declined to review a property rights challenge to rent stabilization laws in New York City. The laws at issue limit rent increases and generally require landlords to renew a tenant’s lease. The denial of certiorari by the Supreme Court has significant implications for the countless rental unit owners and tenants in New York City, where approximately one million homes are subject to rent regulation, and could have serious ripple effects for rental owners and tenants in California.
Read More

February 14, 2024 | Business Litigation

Arbitration in California: New Law Prohibits Automatic Stay of Trial Court Proceedings Pending Appeal of Order Denying Motion to Compel Arbitration

Arbitration in California: New Law Prohibits Automatic Stay of Trial Court Proceedings Pending Appeal of Order Denying Motion to Compel ArbitrationLitigants facing a trial court’s denial of an attempt to compel arbitration may find themselves surprised by a significant change in California law that recently became effective on January 1, 2024: An appeal from an order denying or dismissing a petition to compel arbitration no longer automatically stays trial court proceedings. This reversal by the California Legislature from the historic norm—where an appeal would automatically stay trial court proceedings—amended Civil Code of Procedure Section 1294(a) and now gives trial court judges discretion to stay or continue proceedings. The amendment took effect this year after moving through the Legislature as California Senate Bill No. 365 (SB 365) and was approved by Governor Newsom on October 10, 2023.
Read More

December 20, 2023 | Business Litigation

When a Contract Doesn’t State the Price: It May Still Be Enforceable if it Provides a Practical Method for Determining the Price

When a Contract Doesn’t State the Price: It May Still Be Enforceable if it Provides a Practical Method for Determining the PriceAn allegedly indefinite contract may not be enforceable for two reasons: First, the contract may be too indefinite for the court to administer—no remedy can be properly framed. Second, the indefiniteness of the contract may show a lack of contractual intent. Nevertheless, a contract need not specify price if price can be objectively determined. The absence of a price provision does not render an otherwise valid contract void.
Read More

October 12, 2023 | Business Litigation

The Advocate-Witness Rule in California: Factual Findings of Injury to Judicial Process Required When Disqualifying a Likely Advocate-Witness Notwithstanding Client Consent

The Advocate-Witness Rule in California: Factual Findings of Injury to Judicial Process Required When Disqualifying a Likely Advocate-Witness Notwithstanding Client ConsentIn deciding a motion to disqualify a likely advocate-witness notwithstanding client consent, courts are required to consider multiple factors, including: (1) whether counsel’s testimony is, in fact, needed; (2) the possibility of using the motion to disqualify for purely tactical reasons; and (3) any prejudice to the opposing party and potential injury to the integrity of the judicial process. A motion to disqualify should not be granted absent factual findings of potential injury to the judicial process.
Read More