Daniel J. Koes has been involved in the following published opinions:
- Metz v. U.S. Life Ins. Co. (2nd Cir. 2011) 662 F.3d 600
Second Circuit Court of Appeals explained that--under New York substantive law--an insured can be considered liable for a medical charge even if the insured does not ultimately pay that charge in full or in part.
- Haworth v. Superior Court (2010) 50 Cal.4th 372
In May 2010, Koes argued this appeal before the California Supreme Court. The case involved a trial court order that vacated an arbitration award for the neutral arbitrator's failure to make a disclosure.
- Superior Dispatch, Inc. v. Insurance Corp. of New York (2010) 181 Cal.App.4th 175
Court of Appeal created a new rule on statute of limitations based on insurance commissioner regulations.
- Silverbrand v. County of Los Angeles (2009) 46 Cal.4th 106
California Supreme Court held that the prison-delivery rule applies to a self represented prisoner's filing of a notice of appeal in a civil case.
- Adajar v. RWR Homes, Inc. (2008) 160 Cal.App.4th 563
Court of Appeal concluded that arbitration agreement was not enforceable in action brought by home purchasers against builder.
- Bullock v. Philip Morris USA, Inc. (2008) 159 Cal.App.4th 655
Court of Appeal held a new trial limited to amount of punitive damages was required.
- In re Marriage of Harris (2007) 158 Cal.App.4th 430
Court of Appeal reversed trial court judgment, holding that husband's obligations to wife were not discharged in bankruptcy.
- Forrest v. State of California Department of Corporations (2007) 150 Cal.App.4th 183
Court of Appeal concluded trial court had authority to dismiss action for violation of pre-filing order.
- Safeco Ins. Co. v. Superior Court (2006) 140 Cal.App.4th 874
Court of Appeal granted writ petition, holding that settling insurance companies met their burden by making prima facie showing of coverage under nonparticipating insurance company's policy, which shifted burden to nonparticipating insurer to prove absence of actual coverage.
- Tire Distributors v. Cobrae (2005) 132 Cal.App.4th 538
Trial court refused to enforce settlement agreement, vacated dismissal and granted summary judgment. Court of Appeal reversed concluding trial court lacked jurisdiction to grant summary judgment because dismissal was not subject to vacation.
- Solv-All v. Superior Court (2005) 131 Cal.App.4th 1003
Court of Appeal granted writ petition, concluding petitioners were entitled to statutory relief from default due to their attorney's fault.
- Madrid v. Perot Systems Corp. (2005) 130 Cal.App.4th 440
Court of Appeal concluded plaintiff was not entitled to restitution or injunction under California's unfair competition law (UCL).
- Roy v. Superior Court (2005) 127 Cal.App.4th 337
Court of Appeal held defendants had submitted to California's jurisdiction by participating in litigation.
- Cassim v. Allstate Ins. Co. (2004) 33 Cal.4th 780
California Supreme Court concluded that, assuming counsel committed misconduct in closing argument, no prejudice resulted.
- Oliveros v. County of Los Angeles (2004) 120 Cal. App.4th 1389
Court of Appeal reversed trial court's denial of continuance because order was based solely on impact of a continuance on the court's calendar without considering strong public policy in favor of deciding cases on merit.
- Rojas v. Superior Court of Los Angeles County (2004) 33 Cal.4th 407
California Supreme Court held that mediation privilege was not subject to a "good cause" exception.
- Travelers Casualty & Surety Co. v. Century Surety Co. (2004) 118 Cal.App.4th 1156
Court of Appeal concluded that pro rata allocation based on time on the risk was proper even though defendant's policy contained excess other insurance clause.
- Polibrid Coatings, Inc. v. Superior Court (2003) 112 Cal.App.4th 920
Court of Appeal granted writ petition, holding defendant was entitled to a minimum six-month continuance to give it adequate time to prepare and schedule a timely summary judgment motion.
- Rosen v. State Farm General Ins. (2003) 30 Cal.4th 1070
California Supreme Court resolved an issue of first impression involving the interpretation of insurance policy provisions, concluding that California courts cannot rewrite unambiguously insurance policy terms by relying on public policy which is not tethered to a statute.
- Eisendrath v. Superior Court (2003) 109 Cal.App.4th 351
Court of Appeal issued writ petition, concluding principles of implied waiver did not apply to mediation confidentiality rights.
- Korea Supply Co. v. Lockheed Martin Corp. (2003) 29 Cal.4th 1134
California Supreme Court concluded that non-restitutionary disgorgement of profits was not an available remedy in an individual action under California's UCL.
- Gallimore v. State Farm Fire & Casualty Ins. (2002) 102 Cal.App.4th 1388
Court of Appeal reversed trial court order, concluding that anti-SLAPP statute did not apply.
- Michael v. Aetna Life & Casualty Ins. Co. (2001) 88 Cal.App.4th 925
Court of Appeal reversed trial court order vacating arbitration award, holding appraiser had no duty to disclose.
- Community Assisting Recovery, Inc. v. Aegis Security Ins. Co. (2001) 92 Cal.App.4th 886
Court of Appeal held that insurance companies did not engage in an unfair business practice by using replacement cost less depreciation, rather than fair market value, as basis for adjusting insurance claims.
- Foxgate Homeowners' Assn. v. Bramalea California, Inc. (2001) 26 Cal.4th 1
California Supreme Court held that it would not craft exceptions to mediation confidentiality statutes.
- Vu v. Prudential Property & Casualty Ins. Co. (2001) 26 Cal.4th 1142
California Supreme Court certified question from Ninth Circuit, holding that adjuster's incorrect factual representation that deductible exceeded the loss estopped the insurer from relying on the one-year statute of limitations, if the insured reasonably relied on the misrepresentation in not bringing a lawsuit within one year.
- Cortez v. Purolator Air Filtration Products Co. (2000) 23 Cal.4th 163
California Supreme Court held that unlawfully withheld wages may be recovered as restitutionary remedy under UCL and UCL's four year statute of limitations governed a UCL action based on failure to pay wages.
- Kraus v. Trinity Management Services, Inc. (2000) 23 Cal.4th 116
California Supreme Court held that disgorgement into a fluid recovery fund was not an available UCL remedy in an action that is not certified as a class action.
- Tento International, Inc. v. State Farm Fire & Casualty Co. (9th Cir. 2000) 222 F.3d 660
Ninth Circuit reversed district court judgment, concluding roofer's negligence was efficient proximate cause of the damage.
- Lamden v. La Jolla Shores (1999) 21 Cal.4th 249
California Supreme Court created a rule of deferential review when owner challenges homeowners' association board of directors' maintenance decisions.
NOTE: Use of the Internet for communications with Daniel J. Koes will not establish an attorney-client relationship and messages containing confidential or time-sensitive information should not be sent.