What laws govern utility billing?

Useful Rulings on Utility Billing

Recent Rulings on Utility Billing

HEIDER V. CITY OF SANTA ANA

“In particular, ‘the lodestar method vests the trial court with the discretion to decide which of the hours expended by the attorneys were ‘reasonably spent’ on the litigation’ . . . and to determine the hourly rates that should be used in the lodestar calculus.” Morris v. Hyundai Motor America (2019) 41 Cal.App.5th 24, 35. The Court reduces the requested hours by 42 hours of travel time from Sacramento to Orange County.

  • Hearing

    Jun 23, 2020

CAITLIN GEENEN V. HOUZZ, INC., ET AL.

She alleges that she and other putative class members were not paid at least the minimum wage for all hours worked; were not paid the correct rates for overtime hours because defendant failed to include bonuses, incentive pay, and other forms of remuneration in calculating their pay rates; did not receive required meal and rest breaks or receive required compensation for missed breaks; did not receive their final paychecks when due, and did not receive all wages owed in their final paychecks; did not receive

  • Hearing

    Jun 19, 2020

PARADA VS CITY OF RIVERSIDE

In their First Amended Petition (“Petition”), the petitioners allege that the City’s electric utility rates are taxes, as defined by section 1(e), because they are a charge that the City imposes on Petitioners and other utility customers for electric utility service and the charges exceed the reasonable cost of providing that service.

  • Hearing

    Jun 05, 2020

RUSSELL WYATT VS. CITY OF SACRAMENTO

Utility Services “fees” and “charges” at issue, including the additional amounts charged to Petitioner to fund the “general tax” and transfer of revenue to the general fund pursuant Section 3.20.010, are invalid under article XIII D, section 6(b)(1), (2) and (5).

  • Hearing

    Mar 13, 2020

SAVE THE EL DORADO CANAL V. EL DORADO IRRIGATION DISTRICT

Although the EIR initially described the project as a 51-cubic-feet-per second increase in pumping water to supply the water used in the Owens Valley, other portions of the report analyzed a project of much greater scope, including higher rates of pumping and the installation of infrastructure needed to deliver water to Los Angeles. (Id. at p. 189–190, 139 Cal.Rptr. 396.)

  • Hearing

    Mar 13, 2020

REBAS, INC., A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION DBA TOYOTA-LIFT OF LOS ANGELES VS MATRIX INTERNATIONAL TEXTILE, INC., A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION

Toyota-Lift offers for sale and lease to its clients a full selection of superior forklifts, aerial lift equipment, and utility vehicles.

  • Hearing

    Mar 03, 2020

FARAJOLLAH YADKARIM, TRUSTEE OF THE FARAJOLLAH YADKARIM AND SHAHIN YADKARIM REVOCABLE TRUST DATED JUNE 15, 2017, ET AL. VS NINETY SEVEN 14 HOLCOMB, LLC, A CALIFORNIA LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY, ET AL.

California Code of Civil Procedure, Section 405.4 says that a “[r]eal property claim means the cause or causes of action in a pleading which would, if meritorious, affect (a) title to, or the right to possession of, specific real property or (b) the use of an easement identified in the pleading, other than an easement obtained pursuant to statute by any regulated public utility.”

  • Hearing

    Feb 26, 2020

  • Type

    Real Property

  • Sub Type

    other

FIGUEROA VS. FCA US, LLC

The amount of work required to answer the questions must be so great and the utility of the information sought so minimal, that it would defeat the ends of justice to require the answers. (Columbia Broadcasting System, Inc. v. Superior Court (1968) 263 Cal.App.2d 12.)

  • Hearing

    Feb 25, 2020

RAO BOPPANA ET AL VS CITY OF LOS ANGELES

No encroachments under a revocable permit are allowed near utility appurtenances (such as water meter boxes, gas shut-off valve boxes, street light and traffic signal conduit and pull boxes, and parking meters) where the width of the sidewalk is less than a standard seven feet. The R-Permit was unlawfully allowed and granted. The drawing and diagram submitted do not contain the minimally required information. The approval failed to consider the design, uses, and materials of the structures approved.

  • Hearing

    Jan 14, 2020

  • Type

    Administrative

  • Sub Type

    Writ

DIANA LEJINS, ET AL. VS CITY OF LONG BEACH

The City raised water rates by 7.2% effective October 1, 2018 solely to fund Measure M transfers. The Measure M tax is embedded in the water and sewer rates and is denominated a “service” or “usage” charge on utility bills. Benink Decl., Ex. F (Lejins utility bill). The California Supreme Court has held that “taxes, assessments, fees, and charges are subject to the constitutional strictures when they burden landowners as landowners.” Apartment Assn. of Los Angeles County, Inc. v.

  • Hearing

    Jan 02, 2020

TRAVELERS PROPERTY CASUALTY COMPANY OF AMERICA VS RICARDO LARA, IN HIS CAPACITY AS CALIFORNIA INSURANCE COMMISSIONER

Travelers further argues that the use of unfiled rate information remains lawful unless the rates are first disapproved. AR 983. Travelers’ argument implies that if use of unfiled rates was per se unlawful, the Commissioner's authority to disapprove those rates would be superfluous. AR 983. According to that argument, disapproval must be a prerequisite to finding unified rates unlawful. AR 983. This position is unsupported by the statutory language and relevant case law. AR 983. g.

  • Hearing

    Dec 17, 2019

  • Type

    Administrative

  • Sub Type

    Writ

PLATA, ET AL. V. CITY OF SAN JOSE

Plaintiffs allege Muni Water is the exclusive water utility for 27 approximately 10 percent of the population of San Jose. (Id. at ¶ 7.) Plaintiffs allege the City 28 TENTATIVE RULING RE: MOTION FOR CLASS CERTIFICATION 1 has used and transferred Muni Water funds for purposes other than those for which the funds 2 were collected, in violation of Proposition 218.

  • Hearing

    Nov 22, 2019

RURAL COMMUNITIES UNITED V. COUNTY OF EL DORADO

It continued on to analyze the black carbon emission impact as no significant impact due to the high proportion of organic carbon released in residential wood burning, and the fact that the proposed project would not lead to increased rates of residential wood burning in the County.

  • Hearing

    Nov 22, 2019

SAN JOSE NEUROSPINE V. AETNA INC., ET AL.

(Utility Audit Co v. City of Los Angeles (2003) 112 Cal.App.4th 950, 958; see also CACI, No. 371.) The only essential allegations of a common count are “(1) the statement of indebtedness in a certain sum, (2) the consideration, i.e., goods sold, work done, etc., and (3) nonpayment.” (Farmers Ins. Exchange v. Zerin (1997) 53 Cal.App.4th 445, 460) 1. Request.

  • Hearing

    Nov 21, 2019

  • Judge

    Presiding

  • County

    Santa Clara County, CA

PLATA, ET AL. V. CITY OF SAN JOSE

Muni Water is the exclusive water utility for approximately 10 percent 27 of the population of San Jose. (Id. at ¶ 7.) Plaintiffs allege the City has used and transferred 28 TENTATIVE RULING RE: MOTION TO STRIKE AND/OR DEMURRER 1 Muni Water funds for purposes other than those for which the funds were collected, in violation 2 of Proposition 218.

  • Hearing

    Nov 02, 2019

PLATA, ET AL. V. CITY OF SAN JOSE (CONSOLIDATED ACTION) (LEAD CASE)

Muni Water is the 28 exclusive water utility for approximately 10 percent of the population of San Jose. (FAC, ¶ 7.)

  • Hearing

    Nov 02, 2019

DODD V. GENERAL MOTORS LLC

Defendant provided express warranties by which Defendant undertook to preserve or maintain the utility or performance of the vehicle, or to provide compensation if there was a failure of such performance. Unfortunately, the vehicle had multiple defects and after several attempts to repair the vehicle, Defendant was unable to repair it, and did not replace or repurchase it, prompting the instant action.

  • Hearing

    Oct 31, 2019

WHALEN VS DECISION SCIENCES INTERNATIONAL CORPORATION INC

Plaintiff did not serve the subpoenas without substantial justification; however, the Court additionally notes that Defendants did not adequately reflect the services performed by counsel and counsel's rates of services in the declaration of attorney Timm; e.g., the Court is puzzled why the hourly rates are described as "approximately" and "at least." See par. 3 of attorney Timm's declaration.

  • Hearing

    Oct 22, 2019

  • Type

    Contract

  • Sub Type

    Breach

WHALEN VS DECISION SCIENCES INTERNATIONAL CORPORATION INC

Plaintiff did not serve the subpoenas without substantial justification; however, the Court additionally notes that Defendants did not adequately reflect the services performed by counsel and counsel's rates of services in the declaration of attorney Timm; e.g., the Court is puzzled why the hourly rates are described as "approximately" and "at least." See par. 3 of attorney Timm's declaration.

  • Hearing

    Oct 22, 2019

  • Type

    Contract

  • Sub Type

    Breach

WHALEN VS DECISION SCIENCES INTERNATIONAL CORPORATION INC

Plaintiff did not serve the subpoenas without substantial justification; however, the Court additionally notes that Defendants did not adequately reflect the services performed by counsel and counsel's rates of services in the declaration of attorney Timm; e.g., the Court is puzzled why the hourly rates are described as "approximately" and "at least." See par. 3 of attorney Timm's declaration.

  • Hearing

    Oct 22, 2019

  • Type

    Contract

  • Sub Type

    Breach

HALL VINELAND, LLC ET AL. V. CITY OF ST. HELENA, ET AL.

Cambria Community Services Dist. (1989) 208 Cal.App.3d 49, stands for the proposition that “[a] will-serve letter by a public agency regarding the provision of utility service is not a contract.” (Support Memo. at 16:1-2.) That case articulated no such broad-brush rule.

  • Hearing

    Sep 20, 2019

  • Judge

    Monique Langhorne

  • County

    Napa County, CA

JEFF WADE, ET AL. VS SOURTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON COMPANY

Plaintiffs allege that defendant is a privately owned public utility, enjoying a state-protected monopoly and operating like a governmental entity, and that it spreads risk though its rates charged to ratepayers, and exercises control over public improvements for the supplying of electricity, using the power of eminent domain to obtain rights of way. Plaintiffs allege that the taking of plaintiff’s property permanently deprived plaintiffs of the use and enjoyment of their property.

  • Hearing

    Sep 20, 2019

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    other

THE SACRAMENTO BEE VS. SACRAMENTO COUNTY SHERRIFFS DEPARTMENT

"A plaintiff [who has requested records] is considered the prevailing party if his [or her] lawsuit motivated defendants to provide the primary relief sought or activated them to modify their behavior [citation], or if the litigation substantially contributed to or was demonstrably influential in setting in motion ^ The Court accepts the Lodestar hourly rates set forth in the declaration of Karl Olson as reasonable.

  • Hearing

    Sep 13, 2019

THE SACRAMENTO BEE VS. SACRAMENTO COUNTY SHERRIFFS DEPARTMENT

“A plaintiff [who has requested records] is considered the prevailing party if his [or her] lawsuit motivated defendants to provide the primary relief sought or activated them to modify their behavior [citation], or if the litigation substantially contributed to or was demonstrably influential in setting in motion 1 The Court accepts the Lodestar hourly rates set forth in the declaration of Karl Olson as reasonable.

  • Hearing

    Sep 13, 2019

SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA SCHOOL OF THEOLOGY VS CLAREMONT GRADUATE

By the terms of the 2006 Agreement, Consortium gave [CST] an easement providing additional permanent access for ingress, egress and utility access, as well as the use of a large surface parking area on property owned by [Cross-Complainant]. The 2006 Agreement also served to update and confirm the 1957 and 2001 Agreements.

  • Hearing

    Aug 28, 2019

  • Type

    Real Property

  • Sub Type

    Quiet Title

1 2 3 4 5     last » 

For full print and download access, please subscribe at https://www.trellis.law/.

Please wait a moment while we gather your results.