Allstate Insurance Company v. Barrett, the plaintiff insures the defendant and is currently defending him for injuries a third party suffered after Mr. Barrett shot at him with a handgun. Allstate seeks a declaration that it is not required to defend those accused of intentional torts (here assault). Mr. Barrett responds that he never intended to shoot anyone, and that his firearm discharge was accidental. Judge Edward M. Chen denied summary judgment stating that evidence existed that could show Mr. Barrett did or did not intend to shoot at the third party. He ordered Allstate to continue to defend Mr. Barrett in state court while the action proceeded.
In Elder-Evins v. Casey, the plaintiff pro se appears to be suing a plethora of defendants over a property tax bill which she says violated a number of her constitutional rights (presumably by way of 42 U.S.C. Section 1983, though the Court notes that she never mentions that statute). Judge Saundra Brown Armstrong dismissed the complaint stating that claims against local officials are more properly exhausted under the California Tort Claims Act, and that the constitutional claims are unclear.
In Parker v. Ayers, a pro se prisoner filed a position for habeas corpus, then to his delight, was paroled. The warden moved to dismiss for mootness, which the judge said could be overcome if the petitioner wanted to challenge his conviction. He did not respond and Judge Saundra Brown Armstrong dismissed the petition.
In Vertkin v. Wells Fargo Home Mortgage, the pro se plaintiff is upset that her house was sold at foreclosure and she claimed this was done so illegally. Wells Fargo argued that she had declared bankruptcy and that the bankruptcy trustee was the appropriate plaintiff. Judge Richard Seeborg agreed and dismissed the case for lack of personal jurisdiction.