June 5, 2026
Court of Appeal, First Appellate District, Division One
The Rule of In re the Marriage of McConnell and Jahnke is that a divorcing party who agrees to assume a joint mortgage in a property settlement cannot be forced to remove the other spouse from the mortgage absent an explicit term requiring it, under circumstances where a settlement agreement awards one spouse the marital home "and all debts thereon" without specifying removal obligations.
January 14, 2026 (modified March 23, 2026)
Court of Appeal, Fourth Appellate District, Division Two
The Rule of The Merchant of Tennis is that when employers obtain individual settlement agreements from putative class members through fraud or misrepresentation, a curative notice must inform those employees that rescinding their agreements to join the class action may require repayment of settlement funds at the conclusion of litigation, under Civil Code sections 1689, 1691, and 1693, even though the trial court retains discretion to adjust equities between the parties at judgment.
April 2, 2026 (modified); January 14, 2026 (original)
Court of Appeal of the State of California, Fourth Appellate District, Division Two
The Rule of The Merchant of Tennis is that when putative class members rescind individual settlement agreements obtained through fraud or duress to join a class action lawsuit, they must be notified in the curative notice that they could be responsible for repayment of settlement consideration at the conclusion of litigation pursuant to Civil Code sections 1689, 1691, and 1693, under circumstances where an employer has obtained nearly 1,000 individual settlement agreements from employees during pending class certification proceedings through misrepresentations about the litigation.