On Wednesday, the Supreme Court of California granted review to these cases:

Blair v. Superior Court, S126541: Are county procedures for selecting prospective jurors constitutional? A Hispanic defendant on trial for murder challenged the group of prospective jurors on the grounds that Hispanics are significantly underrepresented and systematically excluded from jury venires. A defense expert testified that Hispanics constitute 14.6% of the jury-eligible population and 8.8% of jury venires. The Court of Appeals found that jury venires, which are drawn from motor vehicle and voting records, do not systematically exclude Hispanics and that the disparity is not unconstitutional.

General Motors v. Franchise Tax Board, S127086: Did net proceeds from certain investment transactions constitute "gross receipts" for purposes of the California sales factor? O’Melveny & Myers has a nice summary of the Court of Appeal’s holding.

Grace v. eBay, S127338: Can internet businesses like eBay be held liable for defamatory web postings? The Recorder reported:

[This case] arose after Roger Grace, editor and co-publisher of Los Angeles' Metropolitan News-Enterprise, purchased vintage magazines on eBay and then criticized their delivery and condition. The seller responded with postings that called Grace "dishonest all the way!!!!" and demanding that he be banned from the Web site.

L.A.'s 2nd District Court of Appeal ruled in July that eBay had protected itself with a release provision in its user agreement that relieved the company of liability for comments by one user against another. But the court said that the California Decency Act of 1996 doesn't immunize eBay against liability for distributing information it knows or had reason to believe was false.

You can read the whole article here.

In re Marriage of Rosendale, S126908: Can a court decline to enforce a premarital waiver of spousal support if at the time of enforcement it would be unconscionable to do so? Eight years into marriage, a wife was in a life-threatening car accident that left her unable to earn a living, and her husband petitioned the court for dissolution of marriage and filed a motion to determine the validity and enforceability of their premarital agreement.

People v. Adams, S127373 and People v. Cage, S127344: In these two cases, the court will consider whether admission of testimonial hearsay by an unavailable declarant violated the confrontation clause in the wake of the United States Supreme Court’s opinion in Crawford v. Washington, 124 S. Ct. 1354 (2004).

People v. Pokovich, S127176: Can statements made by a criminal defendant to psychiatrists, who determined the defendant’s competency to stand trial, be admitted at trial to perjure the defendant’s testimony?