Kashmiri v. Regents
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
Filed 11/28/07 CERTIFIED FOR PUBLICATION IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION TWO MOHAMMAD KASHMIRI et al., Plaintiffs and Respondents, A113662 v. THE REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, (San Francisco City & County Super. Ct. No. CGC-03-422747) ORDER MODIFYING OPINION [NO CHANGE IN JUDGMENT] Defendant and Appellant. THE COURT: It is ordered that the opinion filed herein on November 2, 2007, and previously modified on November 15, 2007, be modified as follows: (1) On page 30, the following sentences should be added as a new paragraph at the end of footnote 12: In its petition for rehearing the University claims that it did make this argument in the lower court and it points to the pages in the record where this argument was raised. We note, however, that the University did not cite to these pages in the record when arguing this issue in its opening brief before this court. The University also never addressed in its reply brief respondents argument that it had waived this issue because it had failed to raise it below. We cannot be expected to comb through more than 1550 pages in the record to determine whether the University did in fact raise this argument. By failing to address respondents argument of waiver, the University forfeited this issue. In any event, as discussed above, this issue fails on its merits. 1 (2) On page 22, in the second sentence of the last full paragraph, the phrase continuing statements is changed to continuing students. The sentence should read: The pivotal question is whether the statements in the catalogues and on the University s website not to raise the PDF for continuing students became a term of the implied-in-fact contract between the professional student subclass and the University. There is no change in the judgment. Date:_________________________ _________________________ Haerle, Acting P.J. 2 Trial Court: San Francisco Superior Court Trial Judge: Hon. James L. Warren Attorneys for Defendant and Appellant: The Regents of the University of California University of California Office of General Counsel Charles F. Robinson Jeffrey A. Blair Christopher M. Patti Michael R. Goldstein James Ernst Holst Howard Rice Nemerovski Canady Falk & Rabkin Jerome B. Falk, Jr. Ethan P. Schulman Keith D. Kessler Attorneys for Plaintiffs and Respondents: Mohammad Kashmiri, et al. Brown, Goldstein & Levy Andrew D. Freeman Deborah T. Eisenberg Staci J. Krupp Altshuler, Berzon, Nussbaum, Rubin & Demain Jonathan Weissglass Danielle E. Leonard Attorneys for Amici Curiae On behalf of Plaintiffs and Respondents American Medical Association Jon N. Ekdahl Leonard A. Nelson Barat S. McClain California Medical Association Catherine I. Hanson 3
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
