What laws govern utility billing?

Useful Rulings on Utility Billing

Recent Rulings on Utility Billing

MARK E GRAHAM VS. SACRAMENTO MUNICIPAL UTILITY DISTRICT

This is a reverse validation action challenging rates set by Defendant Sacramento Municipal Utility District ("SMUD") as unauthorized special taxes in violation of Article XIII C of the California Constitution ("Proposition 26"). SMUD now moves for an order assigning this matter to a prerogative writ department.

  • Hearing

  • Type

    Other

  • Sub Type

    Intellectual Property

ANCIRA MATEO, A MINOR, BY AND THROUGH HIS GUARDIAN AD LITEM YOLANDA FRIAS VS ST. FRANCIS MEDICAL CENTER, ET AL.

Due to the extremely low interest rates on cash deposits and short-term bonds, it would be beneficial to the trust to allow these additional investment types. 4. As to the other requests, the Court requires additional information. Regarding the requests to pay a portion of the household utility costs and to pay $150 per month for purchase of clothing for the beneficiary, the Court requires additional financial information from Plaintiff’s parents.

  • Hearing

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Medical Malpractice

  • Judge

    Maurice A. Leiter or Salvatore Sirna

  • County

    Los Angeles County, CA

PELAYO V. UTILITY PARTNERS OF AMERICA, LLC

Cross-defendant City of Santa Rosa (“City”) demurs to the causes of action in the cross-complaint of Utility Partners of America (“UPA”) for failure to state a cause of action and for uncertainty. The general and special demurrers are sustained with leave to amend. This action was filed on May 30, 2019, by individual plaintiffs against their employer UPA for wage and hour violations and against City for enforcement of stop notices.

  • Hearing

  • Judge

    Gary Nadler via Zoom

  • County

    Sonoma County, CA

WATER RATE CASES (CHINITZ V CITY OF SANTA CRUZ; KESSNER V CITY OF SANTA CLARA;

Plaintiff alleges that the City charges water rate that exceed the cost of service by (1) the use of a four-tiered rate structure which impose disproportionate water rates for different classes of residential and agricultural customers, an increases rates as consumption increases, without correlation to actual cost; and (2) includin franchise and utility taxes in the cost of service.

  • Hearing

CITY OF COMMERCE, ET AL. VS CENTRAL BASIN MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT, A SPECIAL DISTRICT, ET AL.

Orosi Public Utility District, (2008) 167 Cal.App.4th 1063, 1081-83 (in a dispute over sewer assessments, utility district violated Brown Act by disallowing plaintiff from speaking at a meeting and by failing to make the required disclosures before going into closed session). Opp. at 3.

  • Hearing

CLIMATE RESOLVE VS COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, ET AL.

CR further contends there is no indication the SOV rates required by the Mobility Plan are feasible when only 2 percent of the population in Southern California uses public transportation. (AR 291:54157.) The EIR, however, explains the enforcement and feasibility of MM 10-25. The Specific Plan’s Mobility Plan is required as part of the Project. The TMA will be formed and operated.

  • Hearing

  • Type

    Administrative

  • Sub Type

    Writ

DEANNA AIVAZIAN VS. SARKIS TERSAKIAN ET AL

Entitlement to Fees under Civil Code §789.3 Civil Code, §789.3(a) states that a “landlord shall not with intent to terminate the occupancy under any lease or other tenancy or estate at will, however created, of property used by a tenant as his residence willfully cause, directly or indirectly, the interruption or termination of any utility service furnished the tenant, including, but not limited to, water, heat, light, electricity, gas, telephone, elevator, or refrigeration, whether or not the utility service

  • Hearing

  • County

    Los Angeles County, CA

MARCO GARCIA-MARTINEZ VS CITY OF VERNON ET AL

The Utility Contract attached the Cross-Complaint provides: Applicant has reviewed and inspected the applicable City of Vernon rates, rules and regulations for electric, water, and/or gas service(s) and agrees to comply therewith, and with any changes or modifications hereto which may be authorized from time to time by the City.” (Cross-Complaint, Ex. A.) There is no express indemnity provision in the Utility Contract.

  • Hearing

JAIMIE VALENZUELA, ET AL. VS MARTIN ANDALUZ ABARCA, ET AL.

Trailer Sales of Utah, Inc., Utility Trailer Sales of Central California and Utility Trailer) (“Utility”); Kalmar Terminal Tractors of Utah; American Honda Motor Co., Inc.; Honda R&D Americas, Inc.; Honda North America, Inc.; Honda of America Mfg., Inc., Honda Motor Co., Ltd.; Honda R&D Co., Ltd.; Stockton Honda; Corona Automotive Company, LLC dba Honda Cars of Corona (erroneously sued as “Honda Cars of Corona”) (“Honda Corona”); R&R; Enterprise Rent A Car Company of Los Angeles dba Enterprise Car Sales (sued

  • Hearing

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    other

DEANNA AIVAZIAN VS. SARKIS TERSAKIAN ET AL

Civil Code, §789.3 Civil Code, §789.3(a) states that a “landlord shall not with intent to terminate the occupancy under any lease or other tenancy or estate at will, however created, of property used by a tenant as his residence willfully cause, directly or indirectly, the interruption or termination of any utility service furnished the tenant, including, but not limited to, water, heat, light, electricity, gas, telephone, elevator, or refrigeration, whether or not the utility service is under the control of

  • Hearing

  • County

    Los Angeles County, CA

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

INDUSTRIAL JANITORIAL SERVICE, ET AL. V. APPLE INC., ET AL.

If, as often will be the case, the utility of the conduct clearly justifies the practice, no more than a simple motion for summary judgment should be called for.”]

  • Hearing

CREATIVE CARE, INC., ET AL. VS WENDY MCINTYRE

Objections No. 3 and 4, concerning Allen’s fees and rates, are OVERRULED. McEntyre’s Objections to the declaration of Katherine Tatikian are ruled upon as follows. Nos. 1 and 2 concerning Tom Allen’s state bar profile are OVERRULED.

  • Hearing

HARRY D MCGOVERN VS. JIM CARTER

Hourly Rates The California Supreme Court has held that “[t]he reasonable hourly rate is that prevailing in the community for similar work.” (Ibid. at 1095). A trial court must, however, compensate a prevailing party at the hourly rates of out-of-town counsel from a higher fee market where the evidence shows that the party made a good faith effort to hire local counsel but such efforts were impracticable. (Horsford v. Board of Trustees (2005) 132 Cal.App.4th 398- 399).

  • Hearing

JUAN SAAVEDRA ET AL VS CITY OF GLENDALE

Analysis of the tax is governed by projections when the City set rates, not subsequent history. “Common sense dictates that the reasonable costs of service are measured by the amount of costs that the utility projected it would need to pay when the rates were adopted.” Glendale, supra, 2018 WL 6804333 at 12.

  • Hearing

GLENDALE COALITION FOR BETTER GOVERNMENT VS CITY OF GLENDALE

Analysis of the tax is governed by projections when the City set rates, not subsequent history. “Common sense dictates that the reasonable costs of service are measured by the amount of costs that the utility projected it would need to pay when the rates were adopted.” Glendale, supra, 2018 WL 6804333 at 12.

  • Hearing

  • Type

    Other

  • Sub Type

    Intellectual Property

GRACIELA ZAMORA VS HYUNDAI MOTOR AMERICA

Plaintiff alleges that Plaintiff received an express warranty where Defendant undertook to preserve or maintain the utility or performance of the subject Vehicle or to provide compensation if there was a failure in utility or performance. Plaintiff claims that after Plaintiff took possession of the Vehicle and during the warranty period, the Vehicle contained or developed defects including but not limited to a defective engine and defective braking system.

  • Hearing

JASON CLELLAND VS FCA US LLC

Plaintiff alleges that express warranties accompanied the sale of the Vehicle by which Defendant “undertook to preserve or maintain the utility or performance” of the Vehicle or to provide compensation if there was a failure in the Vehicle’s utility or performance. Further, Plaintiff alleges that despite this, the Vehicle was delivered with defects and nonconformities, including various transmission defects.

  • Hearing

  • Type

    Contract

  • Sub Type

    Breach

CITY OF SAN DIEGO VS. COMMISSION ON STATE MANDATES

In Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association, the petitioner challenged the water agency’s water service rates. (Howard Jarvis, 36 Cal.App.5th at 283.) The Third District Court of Appeal denied the challenge, finding that a referendum was an inappropriate vehicle for the challenge, and noted that essential governmental functions should not be “seriously impaired by the referendum process.” (Id. at 301.)

  • Hearing

CITY OF SAN DIEGO VS. COMMISSION ON STATE MANDATES

In Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association, the petitioner challenged the water agency's water service rates. (Howard Jarvis, 36 Cal.App.5th at 283.) The Third District Court of Appeal denied the challenge, finding that a referendimi was an inappropriate vehicle for the challenge, and noted that essential governmental functions should not be "seriously impaired by the referendum process." (Id. at 301.)

  • Hearing

SARA SAMOURIAN VS FCA US LLC

Plaintiff allegedly received an express written warranty in connection with the purchase, in which Defendant undertook to preserve or maintain the utility or performance of the Subject Vehicle or to provide compensation if there is a failure in utility or performance for a specified period of time. (Compl. ¶ 10.) According to Plaintiff, the Subject Vehicle contained or developed defects including, but not limited to a defective transmission system and a defective fuel system. (Compl. ¶ 12.)

  • Hearing

GIZIENSKI VS HARTWELL

Plaintiffs do not dispute the hours claimed or the hourly rates claimed within the declarations of defense counsel.

  • Hearing

  • Type

    Real Property

  • Sub Type

    other

GIZIENSKI VS HARTWELL

Plaintiffs do not dispute the hours claimed or the hourly rates claimed within the declarations of defense counsel.

  • Hearing

  • Type

    Real Property

  • Sub Type

    other

GIZIENSKI VS HARTWELL

Plaintiffs do not dispute the hours claimed or the hourly rates claimed within the declarations of defense counsel.

  • Hearing

  • Type

    Real Property

  • Sub Type

    other

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

1 2 3 4 5 6     last » 

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

Please wait a moment while we load this page.