The morning after its return from the July 4th holiday, the Supreme Court will file its opinions in Jameson v. Desta and Lopez v. Sony Electronics, Inc., which were argued on the early-May calendar. (Briefs here; oral argument videos here and here.)
Jameson raises the issue whether, in the case of a litigant who has been granted a fee waiver (Gov. Code, § 68631), a county’s superior court can employ a policy that has the practical effect of denying the services of an official court reporter to civil litigants who have been granted such a fee waiver, if the result is to preclude those litigants from procuring and providing a verbatim transcript for appellate review? The court later asked for supplemental briefing on the question, “What effect, if any, does the 2015 amendment to California Rules of Court, rule 3.55(7) and the accompanying Advisory Committee Comment have on the resolution of the issue presented by this case?” (First District, Division One, Court of Appeal Justice Robert Dondero is the pro tem.)
Lopez concerns this question: does the six-year limitations period in Code of Civil Procedure section 340.4, which governs actions based on birth and pre-birth injuries and is not subject to tolling for minority, or the two-year limitations period in Code of Civil Procedure section 340.8, which applies to actions for injury based upon exposure to a toxic substance and is subject to tolling for minority, govern an action alleging pre-birth injuries due to exposure to a toxic substance? (Second District, Division Two, Justice Brian Hoffstadt is the pro tem.) [Disclosure: Horvitz & Levy filed an amici curiae brief in this case.]
The opinions can be viewed Thursday starting at 10:00 a.m.
