News & Analysis as of

CA Supreme Court Fees

Ervin Cohen & Jessup LLP

Employers May Now Obtain Equitable Relief for Untimely Arbitration Payments

After years of appellate cases and several rulings holding California employers to the very strict payment standards of the California Arbitration Act (CAA), the California Supreme Court has, for the first time, addressed...more

Husch Blackwell LLP

California Supreme Court Tackles Federal Preemption Issues in Employment and Consumer Arbitrations

Husch Blackwell LLP on

On August 11, 2025, the California Supreme Court issued a decision in the matter of Dana Hohenshelt v. The Superior Court of Los Angeles, ruling that the Federal Arbitration Act (“FAA”) does not preempt the California...more

Fenwick & West LLP

CA Supreme Court: Federal Arbitration Act Does Not Preempt State Law on Timely Arbitration Fee Payment

Fenwick & West LLP on

The California Supreme Court recently held in Hohenshelt v. Superior Court that the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) does not preempt a California law that penalizes businesses that have consumer and employee arbitration...more

Buchalter

Late Fees, High Stakes: California Narrows Arbitration Fee Forfeiture Rule

Buchalter on

In its August 11, 2025 decision in Hohenshelt v. Superior Court (S284498), the California Supreme Court clarified the reach of Code of Civil Procedure Section 1281.98, the 30-day arbitration fee payment rule. While...more

Troutman Pepper Locke

The Current State of the Holder Rule: Friend or Foe? — Moving the Metal: The Auto Finance Podcast

Troutman Pepper Locke on

In this episode of Moving the Metal: The Auto Finance Podcast, Brooke Conkle and Chris Capurso from Troutman Pepper Locke's Consumer Financial Services Practice Group examine the current status of the Federal Trade...more

Dorsey & Whitney LLP

The California Supreme Court (and Court of Appeal) - August 12, 2022

Dorsey & Whitney LLP on

The California Supreme Court issued the following decision on Thursday: Zolly v. City of Oakland, No. S262634: In a case involving the California Constitution’s taxpayer approval requirements for local taxes, the...more

Cozen O'Connor

California Supreme Court: Insurer Immunity Under California’s Ratemaking Statutes Is Narrow

Cozen O'Connor on

In its recent decision, Villanueva v. Fidelity National Title Company, --- P.3d ---, No. S252035, 2021 WL 1031874 (Cal. Mar. 18, 2021), the California Supreme Court rejected an expansive view of the immunity afforded to title...more

Best Best & Krieger LLP

Local Utility Charges Cannot Be Challenged by Referendum

Calif. Supreme Court Decision in Wilde v. City of Dunsmuir - Local utility charges are not subject to referendum, according to a California Supreme Court decision issued Monday that held that water rates fall within the...more

Best Best & Krieger LLP

California Supreme Court: Government Cannot Charge Fee to Redact Police Body Camera Footage

California Public Records Act Provision Permitting Public Agencies to Charge for “Extraction” Analyzed - Government agencies are prohibited from charging a fee to redact police body camera footage in response to a...more

Best Best & Krieger LLP

Failure to Participate in Prop. 218 Hearing Does Not Bar Fee Challenge - Calif. Supreme Court Holds Such Hearings Do Not...

A ratepayer may challenge the method of allocating property-related fees without first participating in the public hearing for, and filing a written protest against, the adoption of such new or increased fees, the California...more

Best Best & Krieger LLP

California Supreme Court Holds Groundwater Pumping Charges Are Not Property-Related Charges Subject to Proposition 218 - Case May...

Best Best & Krieger LLP on

The California Supreme Court concluded recently that a local water agency’s groundwater pumping charges are not property-related charges subject to the substantive and procedural requirements of California Constitution...more

Downey Brand LLP

California Supreme Court Confirms Certain Groundwater Pumping Charges are Outside Scope of Prop 218

Downey Brand LLP on

On December 4, the California Supreme Court ruled that groundwater pumping charges levied to fund a basin-wide conservation and management program were not property-related fees subject to Proposition 218. The decision, City...more

Best Best & Krieger LLP

California Appellate Court Holds Groundwater Pumping Fees are Property-Related Fees Subject to Prop. 218

Best Best & Krieger LLP on

Decision Conflicts with a Separate Appellate Court Decision to be Considered by the California Supreme Court - In Great Oaks Water Company v. Santa Clara Valley Water District, originally issued March 26, the Sixth...more

Best Best & Krieger LLP

California Supreme Court Grants Review in San Buenaventura Groundwater Pumping Fees Case

Appellate Court Decision Held that the Pumping Fee is Subject to Prop. 26 and is not a Property-Related Fee Subject to Prop. 218 - Two California Appellate Court decisions handed down in March addressed whether or not...more

14 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 1

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
- hide
- hide