Brian and Shant discuss the following cases:
Dobbs v. City of LA (Convention Center): In terms of design immunity, to determine whether discretionary authority applies, a question of law, the Court states that as long as reasonable minds can differ, discretionary authority can be provided. The Plaintiff lost when arguing that the design of a bollard, a sturdy pillar used to prevent access to a structure, created a dangerous condition.
Kalta v. Fleets 101, Inc.: Kalta purchased a vehicle through his business that was for personal use and as a result, Defendant argued that Kalta was no longer a consumer and therefore does not have standing to sue under the CLRA. However, the Court of Appeal held any person who acquires goods for personal use is a consumer and thus has standing.
Eck v. City of LA (DWP): An objector at a final settlement approval hearing must have first filed a Motion to Vacate the settlement or Motion to Intervene, and if not, is not considered a party and does not have standing to appeal.
Hyundai v. Morris: It is inappropriate and an abuse of discretion to tie an attorney fee award to the amount of the prevailing parties’ damages or award. As long as the attorney fees are reasonable, fair, and justified, the fees are appropriate. However, the attorney has a responsibility to explain the details about the hours worked. Brian provides further insight by adding how the cost of litigation has routinely affected the issue of attorney fees.