California

The California Supreme Court has ruled that a homeowner who lost her home to foreclosure can challenge the defective transfer of ownership of her mortgage, The Intercept's David Dayen reports. The court held that "'a homeowner who has been foreclosed on by one with no right to do so has suffered an injurious invasion of his or her legal rights at the foreclosing entity’s hands."'

The homeowner's mortgage was transferred into a trust by a bankrupt company four years after new loans were no longer supposed to be added to the trust. The Supreme Court ruled that, even though the homeowner was not a direct party to the transfer of ownership, that she could challenge the defects in the assignment of the deed of trust in order to bring an action for wrongful foreclosure.

California Governor Jerry Brown has vetoed a bill that would have banned drones being flown lower than 350 feet above private property without permission, Wired's Klint Finley reports. In his veto message, Brown wrote that the bill "'could expose the occasional hobbyist and the FAA-approved commercial user alike to burdensome litigation and new causes of action.”'

A coalition of media organizations have asked California Governor Jerry Brown to veto a bill that would make it illegal to fly drones less than 350 feet above private property "'without express permission of the person or entity with the legal authority to grant access or without legal authority,'" The Hill's David McCabe reports. The coalition said the law would impede newsgathering and violate the First Amendment.

The California Senate has just passed a bill that would restrict drones from being flown over wildfires, Los Angeles Times' Patrick McGreevy and Melanie Mason report. Other measures are being considered to restrict drone flights over prisons, schools and homes. For example, there is a bill on the governor's desk that would "criminalize the act of operating an unmanned aircraft system less than 350 feet above ground over private property without the consent of the property's owner."

After an appellate court ruled that cities can't charge more for water than the cost of providing it, California water districts have been left scrambling on how to curb heavy water usage during a time of drought, the Los Angeles Times' Matt Stevens reports: "Now, agencies must prove that the high water rates for heavy users are not meant as punishment but actually reflect the cost of delivering the extra water."

The problem is that many California water districts have the biggest users pay much more than users that save water, and they now have to show a "'clear nexus'" between operating costs and price, Stevens reports.

In the underlying case, San Juan Capistrano's water rates were challenged as arbitrary and unconstitutional.

California charities must disclose the names of their major contributors, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit ruled last week. The Los Angeles Times' Maura Dolan reports that the Center for Competitive Politics lost the argument that its First Amendment right to the freedom of association is violated by the reporting requirement.

California Attorney General Kamala D. Harris ordered nonprofits to disclose donors who contributed more than $5,000 in a single year. The disclosures, however, were only to the attorney general's office, not to the public too.

The Recorder's Marisa Kendall reports on the ebb and flow between arbitration and class actions and the U.S. Supreme Court and the California Supreme Court. The U.S. Supreme Court's ruling in AT& T Mobility v. Concepcion led to class actions drying up; the justices found that the Federal Arbitration Act pre-empted California's ban on class arbitration. As a result, companies shielded themselves with agreements providing that disputes with customers and employees must be resolved through arbitration.

But the California Supreme Court has agreed to review whether consumers seeking injunctive relief under California law can be forced into arbitration. The California justices also will hear a case that will "potentially lay out new grounds by which courts can reject unfair or one-sided arbitration agreements." In the latter case, the Kendall reports the California Supreme Court is likely to use the case to clarify what makes an arbitration agreement too one-sided or unfair to enforce.

The California Supreme Court has rejected San Diego's blanket ban on where convicted sex offenders can live, the Los Angeles Times' Maura Dolan reports. The Supreme Court ruled that prohibiting sex offenders from living within 2,000 feet of schools and parks was unconstitutional because the blanket ban"'has severely restricted their ability to find housing.'"

The California Supreme Court has ruled that health officials must provide more information about the citations given to facilities found to be lax in treating developmentally and mentally ill people, Sacramento Bee's Denny Walsh reports. The unanimous court ruled that the state Department of Public Health provided too little information in response to a public-records request about citations issued against the seven largest state-owned-and-operated treatment facilities, Walsh further reports. The DOH argued that another law required heavy redactions in order to protect the privacy of the patients, but the Supreme Court ruled that the state Long-Term Act was a special exception.

A bill has been introduced in the California Senate to make it illegal for drones to be flown over private property unless drone operators have the permission of owners, the San Francisco Business Times' Patrick Hoge reports.

In another drone-legislative development, a bill has been proposed in Oklahoma to shield anyone from liability if they destroy a drone that flies below 300 feet over their property and encroaches on their privacy, The Oklahoman's Rick Green reports.