November 3, 2026 oral argument calendar — Leeper, S289305

Full Retained Text

Text from the retained reading copy, without editorial rewriting. Page markers, extraction artifacts and publisher navigation may remain. Use the retained original to inspect its typography and pagination.

[PDF page 1]
FILED 10/14/2026 
 
 
 
SUPREME COURT OF CALIFORNIA 
ORAL ARGUMENT CALENDAR 
SAN FRANCISCO 
NOVEMBER 3, 2026 
 
 
 
The following cases are placed upon the calendar of the Supreme Court for hearing at its 
courtroom in the Ronald M. George State Office Complex, Earl Warren Building, 350 
McAllister Street, Fourth Floor, San Francisco, California, on November 3, 2026.  The public 
may attend in person and also have access to argument via live-streaming on the judicial branch 
website:  https://supreme.courts.ca.gov/. 
 
TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 3, 2026 — 9:00 A.M. 
 
(1) 
 
People v. Eaton (John Allen), S289903 
 
(justice pro tempore to be assigned) 
 
(2) 
 
Leeper (Christina) v. Shipt, Inc., et al., S289305 
 
(Krause, J., assigned justice pro tempore) 
 
(3) 
 
Cash (Michael) v. County of Los Angeles, S291827 
 
(McConnell, A.P.J., assigned justice pro tempore) 
 
1:30 P.M. 
 
(4) 
Cohen (Charles) et al. v. Superior Court of Los Angeles County (Thomas 
Schwartz et al., Real Parties in Interest), S285484 
 
(justice pro tempore to be assigned) 
 
(5) 
People v. Mataele (Tupoutoe), S291019 
 
(Hill, A.P.J., assigned justice pro tempore) 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                                                              GUERRERO 
 
 
 
 
 
 
________________________________ 
 
 
 
 
     Chief Justice 
 
 
 



[PDF page 2]
2 
 
SUPREME COURT OF CALIFORNIA 
ORAL ARGUMENT CALENDAR 
SAN FRANCISCO 
NOVEMBER 3, 2026 
 
 
The following case summaries are issued to inform the public about cases that the 
California Supreme Court has scheduled for oral argument and of their general subject 
matter.  The descriptions set out below are, in most instances, reproduced from the 
original news release issued when review in each of these matters was granted, and are 
provided for the convenience of the public.  The descriptions do not necessarily reflect 
the view of the court or define the specific issues that will be addressed by the court. 
 
 
TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 3, 2026 — 9:00 A.M. 
 
 
(1)  People v. Eaton (John Allen), S289903 
(justice pro tempore to be assigned) 
#25-129  People v. Eaton (John Allen), S289903.  (C096853; nonpublished opinion; 
Sacramento County Superior Court; 93F04514.)  Petition for review after the Court of 
Appeal affirmed an order granting in part and denying in part a post-judgment motion in 
a criminal matter.  This case presents the following issue:  May a trial court reimpose a 
previously imposed upper term sentence under Penal Code section 1172.75, subdivision 
(d)(4) where the facts underlying one or more aggravating circumstances were neither 
stipulated to by the defendant nor found true beyond a reasonable doubt at trial by the 
jury or by the judge in a court trial (cf. Pen. Code, § 1170, subd. (b)(2); id., § 1172.75, 
subd. (d)(2))? 
(2)  Leeper (Christina) v. Shipt, Inc., et al., S289305 
(Krause, J., assigned justice pro tempore) 
#25-91  Leeper (Christina) v. Shipt, Inc., et al., S289305.  (B339670; 107 Cal.App.5th 
1001; Los Angeles County Superior Court; 24STCV06485.)  Review ordered on the 
court’s own motion after the Court of Appeal reversed an order denying a motion to 
compel arbitration in a civil action and remanded with directions.  The court limited 
review to the following issues:  (1) Does every Private Attorneys General Act (Lab. 
Code, § 2698 et seq.) (PAGA) action necessarily include both individual and non-



[PDF page 3]
3 
 
individual PAGA claims, regardless of whether the complaint specifically alleges 
individual claims?  (2) Can a plaintiff choose to bring only a non-individual PAGA 
action? 
(3)  Cash (Michael) v. County of Los Angeles, S291827 
(McConnell, A.P.J., assigned justice pro tempore) 
#25-287  Cash (Michael) v. County of Los Angeles, S291827.  (B336980; 111 
Cal.App.5th 741; Los Angeles County Superior Court; BC718190.)  Petition for review 
after the Court of Appeal affirmed post-judgment orders in a civil action.  This case 
presents the following issues:  (1) Did the trial court’s across-the-board reduction of the 
fees requested by plaintiff’s counsel trigger heightened scrutiny of its fee order on 
appeal?  (2) Did the trial court commit reversible error in reducing the fee request on an 
across-the-board basis? 
1:30 P.M. 
 
 
(4)  Cohen (Charles) et al. v. Superior Court of Los Angeles County (Thomas Schwartz 
et al., Real Parties in Interest), S285484 
(justice pro tempore to be assigned) 
#24-173  Cohen (Charles) et al. v. Superior Court of Los Angeles County (Thomas 
Schwartz et al., Real Parties in Interest), S285484.  (B330202; 102 Cal.App.5th 706; Los 
Angeles County Superior Court; 22SMCV00736.)  Petition for review after the Court of 
Appeal granted a petition for peremptory writ of mandate.  The court limited review to 
the following issue:  Does Government Code section 36900, subdivision (a) confer upon 
private citizens a right to redress violations of municipal ordinances? 
(5)  People v. Mataele (Tupoutoe), S291019 
(Hill, A.P.J., assigned justice pro tempore) 
#25-147  People v. Mataele (Tupoutoe), S291019.  Application to transfer cause before 
decision by the Court of Appeal.  This case presents issues relating to the noncapital 
resentencing of a capital defendant following remand.  In addition, the court directed the 
parties to brief and argue whether this court has exclusive jurisdiction over this appeal, or 



[PDF page 4]
4 
 
whether this appeal may be decided by the Court of Appeal.  (See Cal. Const., art. VI, § 
11, subd. (a); People v. Coleman (1991) 53 Cal.3d 949, 951, fn. 1.)