Every attorney has felt the concern over a growing receivable, and the frustration of a nonpaying client. Carl Mueller litigates these billing disputes and explains what attorneys should know to avoid them and to win them:

• All the billing disputes are basically the same, so…
• Spot the “red flags.” (You know what they are.)
• If you do get into a dispute, know the 2021 Pech v. Morgan case—and get an expert. We discuss.
• Haven’t brushed up on Business and Professions Code sections 6146, 6147, and 6148 in a while? Read them. Do them. An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.

In the next episode, we will cover Carl’s top 10 tips for avoiding a fee dispute.

Carl I. S. Mueller’s biography, LinkedIn profile.

Appellate Specialist Jeff Lewis' biography, LinkedIn profile, and Twitter feed.

Appellate Specialist Tim Kowal's biography, LinkedIn profile, Twitter feed, and YouTube page.

Sign up for Not To Be Published, Tim Kowal’s weekly legal update, or view his blog of recent cases.

The California Appellate Law Podcast thanks Casetext for sponsoring the podcast. Listeners receive a discount on Casetext Basic Research at casetext.com/CALP. The co-hosts, Jeff and Tim, were also invited to try Casetext’s newest technology, CoCounsel, the world’s first AI legal assistant. You can discover CoCounsel for yourself with a demo and free trial at casetext.com/CoCounsel.

Other items discussed in the episode:

• Pech v. Morgan (2021) 61 Cal.App.5th 841
• Videos from this episode will be posted at Tim Kowal’s YouTube channel.

Appellate justices’ research attorneys are the ones advising the justices about your arguments and writing the opinions. We discuss 10 tips offered at a recent Orange County Bar Association event. Here is a taste:

😮 Biggest surprise: The Court of Appeal wants hyperlinked briefs. They want to be able to click on your record cites to confirm your fact statements. If you wondered how to get the partners at your firm to get you a Clearbrief subscription, tune in.

😡 Start your brief by identifying the judgment or order you’re challenging. This is a court of review, after all—so tell them up front what you want them to review.

📃 Read your Table of Contents. The justices do. So make it persuasive.

🥴 We also discuss the recent Masimo v. Vanderpool Law Firm case, as the Court of Appeal continues to make examples of uncivil lawyers.

The recurring theme is: build trust. Good cites, organization, and civility build trust. Bad cites, poor organization, and incivility can get you sanctioned.

Appellate Specialist Jeff Lewis' biography, LinkedIn profile, and Twitter feed.

Appellate Specialist Tim Kowal's biography, LinkedIn profile, Twitter feed, and YouTube page.

Sign up for Not To Be Published, Tim Kowal’s weekly legal update, or view his blog of recent cases.

The California Appellate Law Podcast thanks Casetext for sponsoring the podcast. Listeners receive a discount on Casetext Basic Research at casetext.com/CALP. The co-hosts, Jeff and Tim, were also invited to try Casetext’s newest technology, CoCounsel, the world’s first AI legal assistant. You can discover CoCounsel for yourself with a demo and free trial at casetext.com/CoCounsel.

Other items discussed in the episode:

• Videos from this episode will be posted at Tim Kowal’s YouTube channel.

Last time, we set the table with special-education attorney Tim Adams to discuss the big 9th Circuit win for parents of kids with IEPs (individualized education protocols). Now we dig in to Irvine Unified School District v. Landers and Gagliano.

After covering the fact that the school district, to get out of helping a dyslexic student get the help she needed, spent over $1.13 million on its attorneys in over five-years of litigation involving a “trial by experts.” In this discussion, Tim Adams explains that IEPs are a constitutional right, so school districts are not legally permitted to consider their costs. Yet school district spokespersons take to the press to decry how these lawsuits are breaking the bank. So what is going on here?

Tim Adams’ biography.

Appellate Specialist Jeff Lewis' biography, LinkedIn profile, and Twitter feed.

Appellate Specialist Tim Kowal's biography, LinkedIn profile, Twitter feed, and YouTube page.

Sign up for Not To Be Published, Tim Kowal’s weekly legal update, or view his blog of recent cases.

The California Appellate Law Podcast thanks Casetext for sponsoring the podcast. Listeners receive a discount on Casetext Basic Research at casetext.com/CALP. The co-hosts, Jeff and Tim, were also invited to try Casetext’s newest technology, CoCounsel, the world’s first AI legal assistant. You can discover CoCounsel for yourself with a demo and free trial at casetext.com/CoCounsel.

Other items discussed in the episode:

• Irvine Unified School District v. Landers and Gagliano, No. 22-55286
• Why One School District Spent $1 Million Fighting a Special-Education Student - WSJ
• Episode 69, Special Education Law with Tim Adams
• Videos from this episode will be posted at Tim Kowal’s YouTube channel.

A big 9th Circuit win for parents of kids with IEPs (individualized education protocols) came down recently, and the prevailing attorney is podcast alum Tim Adams.

In the first of this two-part discussion, we set the table to discuss Irvine Unified School District v. Landers and Gagliano. For example, to understand why parents trying to help their dyslexic daughter needed to make a federal case out of it, you should know:

💵 The school district spent over $1.13 million on its attorneys (at hourly rates up to $1300!).

🥼 The hearings in these cases are often a “trial by experts.”

🙈 IEPs are a constitutional right, so school districts are not legally permitted to consider their costs—but obviously they do. So how does that work?

⚔️ Parents wrongfully denied an adequate IEP have no recourse but to get their children the resources they need—out of pocket—and then fight for reimbursement.

Tim Adams’ biography.

Appellate Specialist Jeff Lewis' biography, LinkedIn profile, and Twitter feed.

Appellate Specialist Tim Kowal's biography, LinkedIn profile, Twitter feed, and YouTube page.

Sign up for Not To Be Published, Tim Kowal’s weekly legal update, or view his blog of recent cases.

The California Appellate Law Podcast thanks Casetext for sponsoring the podcast. Listeners receive a discount on Casetext Basic Research at casetext.com/CALP. The co-hosts, Jeff and Tim, were also invited to try Casetext’s newest technology, CoCounsel, the world’s first AI legal assistant. You can discover CoCounsel for yourself with a demo and free trial at casetext.com/CoCounsel.

Other items discussed in the episode:

• Irvine Unified School District v. Landers and Gagliano, No. 22-55286
• Why One School District Spent $1 Million Fighting a Special-Education Student - WSJ
• Episode 69, Special Education Law with Tim Adams
• Videos from this episode will be posted at Tim Kowal’s YouTube channel.

Are you expecting a lawsuit? And do you want to get that lawsuit into federal court? If your client is domiciled in California, you need to know about “snap removals.” If you get wind of the lawsuit before it is served, you might be able to defeat the removal-bar on home-state defendants.

But don’t commit a “super snap” removal. That’s when you remove before the complaint is officially filed. The 9th Circuit just rejected those.

We discuss Casola v. Dexcom, Inc., and how to learn about lawsuits before they are even filed.

Appellate Specialist Jeff Lewis' biography, LinkedIn profile, and Twitter feed.

Appellate Specialist Tim Kowal's biography, LinkedIn profile, Twitter feed, and YouTube page.

Sign up for Not To Be Published, Tim Kowal’s weekly legal update, or view his blog of recent cases.

The California Appellate Law Podcast thanks Casetext for sponsoring the podcast. Listeners receive a discount on Casetext Basic Research at casetext.com/CALP. The co-hosts, Jeff and Tim, were also invited to try Casetext’s newest technology, CoCounsel, the world’s first AI legal assistant. You can discover CoCounsel for yourself with a demo and free trial at casetext.com/CoCounsel.

Other items discussed in the episode:

• Casola v. Dexcom, Inc., No. 23-55403 (9th Cir. Apr. 10, 2024)
• Videos from this episode will be posted at Tim Kowal’s YouTube channel.

Racial minorities are sometimes removed from prospective juries—just like everybody else. But the Legislature is so concerned that this could happen on the (obviously improper) basis of race that the Racial Justice Act prohibits a challenge to a racial minority even on the basis of proper factors, such as lack of life experience. And if that happens, the Legislature has declared not only that this is against law, but operates as a get-a-new-trial-free card.

But the California Constitution prohibits get-a-new-trial-free cards. Instead, no judgment may be reversed—even if the judgment is rife with error—unless the error results in a “miscarriage of justice.”

Consider how these opinions might be reconciled:

• People v. Uriostegui (D2d6 Apr. 5, 2024 No. B325200) ___ Cal.App.5th ___ held violations of the Racial Justice Act are per se reversible.
• In People v. Simmons (2023) 96 Cal.App.5th 323, Justice Yegan argued in dissent that a attempting to bind the courts to a legislative definition of the constitutional term “miscarriage of justice” violates the doctrine of separation of powers.
• The Supreme Court in F.P. v. Monier (2017) 3 Cal.5th 1099 held that, although the Legislature mandates that trial courts make express findings on principal controverted issues, a court’s failure to do so is not per se reversible because the Constitution first requires a finding that the failure worked a miscarriage of justice.
• In Abdelqader v. Abraham (Cal. Ct. App. Mar. 10, 2022 No. D078652) --- Cal.Rptr.3d ----, failure to make the statutorily-required findings under F.C. 3044 to support awarding custody to a person previously found to have committed domestic violence was per se reversible.
• In re Marriage of Steiner and Hosseini (2004) 117 Cal.App.4th 519 held that, although the Legislature purported to make inadequate disclosures in property-division cases per se reversible, the Legislature cannot provide “a ‘get-a-new-trial-free’ card” in light of the constitutional requirement to show a miscarriage of justice.

Appellate Specialist Jeff Lewis' biography, LinkedIn profile, and Twitter feed.

Appellate Specialist Tim Kowal's biography, LinkedIn profile, Twitter feed, and YouTube page.

Sign up for Not To Be Published, Tim Kowal’s weekly legal update, or view his blog of recent cases.

The California Appellate Law Podcast thanks Casetext for sponsoring the podcast. Listeners receive a discount on Casetext Basic Research at casetext.com/CALP. The co-hosts, Jeff and Tim, were also invited to try Casetext’s newest technology, CoCounsel, the world’s first AI legal assistant. You can discover CoCounsel for yourself with a demo and free trial at casetext.com/CoCounsel.

Other items discussed in the episode:

• Tim’s writeup on Oriostegui, The Racial Justice Act Is Unconstitutional

Every day as an appeals lawyer brings new puzzles. But some puzzles repeat. So in this episode, we compile the top 10 tips dispensed regularly to trial attorneys working in family court. They include:

👉 Know your appealable issues—appeal now, or lose it forever!

👉 Request a statement of decision. Don’t need to, you say? Judge already gave a tentative opinion, you say? You really need to hear this advice.

👉 Get the standard of review right, and use this tip when challenging discretionary rulings.

👉 Brief like an appellate attorney: Put cites on everything. Put headers on everything.

👉 Make a record!

And five more!

One thing we didn’t cover: Making Family Code § 2122 set-aside motions. Definitely consider that in your case.

Appellate Specialist Jeff Lewis' biography, LinkedIn profile, and Twitter feed.

Appellate Specialist Tim Kowal's biography, LinkedIn profile, Twitter feed, and YouTube page.

Sign up for Not To Be Published, Tim Kowal’s weekly legal update, or view his blog of recent cases.

Other items discussed in the episode:

• Good example of the importance of the statement of decision: Abdelqader v. Abraham (Cal. Ct. App. Mar. 10, 2022 No. D078652) --- Cal.Rptr.3d ---- [F.C. 3044 presumption of unfitness triggered by prior DV finding may be rebutted only by written findings—lack of SOD required reversal].
  • Tim’s writeup on Abdelqader here. One of CALP’s top cases here.
  • But Abdelqader was not followed in Marriage of Burger.
  • Abdelqader was followed in Hutchins.
• Tim’s article on sanctions for appellate briefing defects: “Attorney who ignored appellate rules hit with $50k in sanctions”. Case is Mandir, Inc. v. Tiwari (D4d3 Mar. 27, 2023 No. G060437) (nonpub. opn.).
• Videos from this episode will be posted at Tim Kowal’s YouTube channel.

The U.S. Supreme Court provides awaited guidance on public officials’ use of social media, and the California Supreme Court gives a cautionary tale about waiving the right to a jury trial. Jeff and I discuss:

• 📰Free Speech on Government Social Media: Lindke v. Freed (Mar. 15, 2024, No. 22-611), notable for being short and unanimous, holds that, when a public official talks about official business on a private social media page, it’s no longer a private social media page.
• ⚖️Jury waivers: If you waive, and the trial judge declines to set aside the waiver, it’s game over: any right to appeal is symbolic only.
• 🤷Also symbolic: the different between waiver and forfeiture. The difference, it is said, is that waiver is intentional. But the Court notes that waiver can also be unintentional. That pretty much obliterates any distinction between the terms, save for spelling.
• 👎The facts were based solely on filed documents, not testimony. So appellate review is de novo, right? Wrong. Appellate courts don’t defer to fact-finding because the trial court is better at it. They defer because it’s not the appellate court’s job description.
• ⛪A Church of Scientology case involving Leah Remini is poised for an anti-SLAPP appeal.

Appellate Specialist Jeff Lewis' biography, LinkedIn profile, and Twitter feed.

Appellate Specialist Tim Kowal's biography, LinkedIn profile, Twitter feed, and YouTube page.

Sign up for Not To Be Published, Tim Kowal’s weekly legal update, or view his blog of recent cases.

The California Appellate Law Podcast thanks Casetext for sponsoring the podcast. Listeners receive a discount on Casetext Basic Research at casetext.com/CALP. The co-hosts, Jeff and Tim, were also invited to try Casetext’s newest technology, CoCounsel, the world’s first AI legal assistant. You can discover CoCounsel for yourself with a demo and free trial at casetext.com/CoCounsel.

Other items discussed in the episode:

• Lindke v. Freed (Mar. 15, 2024, No. 22-611)
• TriCoast Builders v. Fonnegra (Feb. 26, 2024 No. S273368)
• Jones v. Solgen Construction, LLC (D5 Feb. 26, 2024, No. F085918) [cert. for pub.].
• Remini v. Church of Scientology
• “Motion granted, Bimbo!” — the Candi Bimbo Doll case; Wood v. S.F. Cnty. Superior Court (D1d2 Mar. 14, 2024 No. A168463) [cert. for pub.]
• Videos from this episode will be posted at Tim Kowal’s YouTube channel.