For the second week in a row, the Supreme Court’s conference produced no straight grants, but there were some actions of note, including:
- Supreme Court won’t hear CARE Act challenge.
- COVID insurance grant-and-hold. Shusha v. Century-National Insurance Company is a grant-and-hold for Another Planet Entertainment v. Vigilant Insurance Co., where the Supreme Court last month agreed to answer this question for the Ninth Circuit: “Can the actual or potential presence of the COVID-19 virus on an insured’s premises constitute ‘direct physical loss or damage to property’ for purposes of coverage under a commercial property insurance policy?” In Shusha, the Second District, Division Seven, Court of Appeal published opinion held a restaurant’s “allegations that contamination by the COVID-19 virus physically altered its restaurant premises were sufficient to withstand demurrer.”
- COVID insurance transfer denial. The court denied a petition to transfer to itself a writ proceeding pending in the Court of Appeal. In San Jose Sharks v. Superior Court, the National Hockey League and a number of teams said their case for COVID property insurance coverage presented the question raised in Another Planet (see above) better than Another Planet. The Sixth District Court of Appeal issued an order to show cause in February and will now presumably decide the writ petition on its merits. The Supreme Court denied a similar transfer petition in The Inns by the Sea v. California Mutual Insurance Company and later denied review after the Court of Appeal decided the case (see here).
- Criminal case grant-and-holds. There were seven criminal case grant-and-holds: one each waiting for decisions in People v. Lynch (see here); In re Vaquera (see here), which has been fully briefed for almost three years; Camacho v. Superior Court (which is technically a civil case, involving a civil commitment under the Sexually Violent Predators Act (see here)); People v. Rojas (see here); People v. Mitchell (see here); and People v. Walker (see here); and one waiting for both Rojas and People v. Hardin (see here).
- Dependency grant-and-hold dispositions. The court sent seven grant-and-hold cases back to the Courts of Appeal for reconsideration in light of January’s decision in In re D.P. (2023) 14 Cal.5th 266.
