Silas v. Arden
213 Cal. App. 4th 75
| Cal. Ct. App. | 2012Background
- Arden appeals judgment in Silas’s malicious-prosecution action arising from Gunnell’s malpractice suit against Silas.
- Gunnell’s malpractice suit centered on whether Silas could rely on workers’-compensation exceptions under Lab. Code §3602 to permit a civil action.
- Metrocolor case initially held that workers’ compensation exclusive remedy applied; Johns-Manville rule limited the fraudulent-concealment theory.
- Silas moved for summary judgment; the trial court granted it on fraudulent-concealment theory, leading to appellate affirmation.
- Silas filed malicious-prosecution action in 2008; Arden challenged limitations under CCP §340.6 (one-year) per Vafi; the trial court and appellate courts scrutinized retroactivity and waived defenses; the jury found for Silas with damages and punitive damages.
- The disposition affirmed the judgment; retroactivity of Vafi was addressed but not applied to bar Silas’s action; damages and punitive-damages issues were reviewed for sufficiency and preservation.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Limitations period applicability | Silas relied on long-standing two-year limit; Vafi should apply prospectively. | Vafi retroactively applies one-year limit under CCP §340.6. | Not retroactively applied; judgment affirmed. |
| Probable cause and malice evidence | Arden lacked probable cause and acted with malice; failed to withdraw baseless misappropriation claim. | Arden acted within professional discretion; facts supported trial theory. | Sufficient evidence supports probable cause deficiency and malice finding. |
| Damages and collateral-source offset | Punitive damages appropriate; collateral-source offset moot due to lack of record. | Charges and records insufficient to offset or challenge punitive damages. | Punitive damages upheld; record insufficient to review collateral-source offset. |
Key Cases Cited
- Stavropoulos v. Superior Court, 141 Cal.App.4th 190 (Cal. App. Dist. 2nd) (two-year limitations for malicious-prosecution actions previously applied)
- Vafi v. McCloskey, 193 Cal.App.4th 874 (Cal. App. 4th Dist.) (one-year CCP §340.6 limitations for attorneys malpractice actions)
- Johns-Manville Products Corp. v. Superior Court, 27 Cal.3d 465 (Cal. 1980) (fraudulent-concealment exception to workers’ compensation exclusivity)
- Foster v. Xerox Corp., 40 Cal.3d 306 (Cal. 1985) (employee may recover at law under specific exceptions to WC exclusivity)
- Hughes Aircraft Co. v. Superior Court, 44 Cal.App.4th 1790 (Cal. App. Dist. 2nd) (elements of fraudulent-concealment exception require concealment of injury and nexus to employment)
- Jensen v. Amgen, Inc., 105 Cal.App.4th 1322 (Cal. App. Dist. 2nd) (awareness of injury affects application of WC exclusivity exceptions)