Monster Energy Co. v. Schechter
MONSTER ENERGY COMPANY v. SCHECHTER
- Area
- civil
- Panel
- Cantil (author), Carol A. Corrigan, Goodwin H. Liu, Chin, Sakauye, Mariano-Florentino Cuéllar, Leondra R. Kruger
Analysis
No analysis yet. When one exists it is a model's reading of this opinion — the rulings it reviewed, whether it agrees with the court, and the authorities it checked — shown beside the court's own disposition, never in place of it. How analyses are made.
Opinion
The petition for review is granted. The issues to be briefed and argued are limited to the following: (1) When a settlement agreement contains confidentiality provisions that are explicitly binding on the parties and their attorneys and the attorneys sign the agreement under the legend "APPROVED AS TO FORM AND CONTENT," have the attorneys consented to be bound by the confidentiality provisions? (2) When evaluating the plaintiff's probability of prevailing on its claim under Code of Civil Procedure section 425.16, subdivision (b), may a court ignore extrinsic evidence that supports the plaintiff's claim, or accept the defendant's interpretation of an undisputed but ambiguous fact over that of the plaintiff?