The Brief, August 5, 2026
NATIONAL
On July 29, the FTC, joined by California through the Los Angeles County Counsel and by Utah, sued Hims & Hers Health, Inc. in the Northern District of California (No. 3:26-cv-7871). The nine-count complaint alleges the telehealth company "misled hundreds of thousands of consumers by charging them for unwanted prescription medication subscriptions without their express informed consent," and shared sensitive health information with ad platforms. It is the current enforcement roadmap for telehealth and subscription-model counsel.
In Whateley v. Lackey (No. 25-1751, published, decided July 31), Judge Harris wrote for a unanimous panel that "Virginia's personalized license plate messages are private speech subject to First Amendment protection," reviving a suit over a revoked anti-police plate. Personalized plates fall outside the government-speech doctrine of Walker because the state conveys no message of its own. A clean, quotable limit on the government-speech doctrine.
CALIFORNIA & LA
In Gilead Tenofovir Cases (S283862, filed August 3), Justice Groban wrote for the majority, over a dissent by Justice Evans: "even assuming drug manufacturers owe a broader duty of care apart from their duty to design, manufacture, and market nondefective drugs, the Rowland factors compel an exception to such a duty." The decision ends the theory, pressed by roughly 24,000 coordinated plaintiffs, that Gilead was negligent for holding back a safer HIV drug while selling a nondefective one. Duty in product cases stays tethered to defect, and the Rowland reasoning will travel beyond pharma.
In Farmers Ins. Exchange v. Superior Court (E087128, Fourth District, Division Two, filed July 9, certified for publication August 4), the court granted the insurer's writ: "Since no triable issue of material fact exists regarding whether a binding settlement agreement was created on August 25, 2021, Farmers is entitled to summary adjudication on its second cause of action for declaratory relief." Timely acceptance of a third-party claimant's policy limits demand forms a contract as a matter of law, cutting off the manufactured bad faith set-up. Both sides of personal injury practice should adjust demand and acceptance protocols now.
In Cluck v. GEO Secure Services (D087341, Fourth District, Division One, filed August 3, partially published), the court affirmed denial of a motion to compel arbitration after reading the arbitration agreement together with a confidentiality agreement signed the same day: "In directing the claims Cluck is most likely to bring to arbitration, while permitting GEO to pursue its most likely claims in court, the overall agreement is unfairly one-sided." Courts will read the onboarding paperwork as a package. Employers should audit everything signed at hire; plaintiffs opposing motions to compel should demand the full stack.
ORANGE COUNTY
In the week's only published opinion from Santa Ana's appellate court, Applied Medical Resources Corp. v. Public Utilities Commission (G065804, filed August 4), Justice Sanchez affirmed two CPUC decisions rejecting the Rancho Santa Margarita device maker's private campus microgrid, holding they "are consistent with controlling law, most notably Public Utilities Code sections 218 and 8371." The court added that "[a]n unregulated third party cannot decide when a microgrid may begin actively discharging to the electric utility's grid while utility employees may be working on the grid." First published guidance on the energy projects Orange County manufacturers are increasingly pursuing.
On July 30, Orange County Superior Court Judge Carmen Luege ruled that Huntington Beach must comply with the State Auditor's investigation of its settlement with the Pacific Airshow operator (Audit No. 2024-103), rejecting the city's charter city defense. As reported by Voice of OC, the order directs that the city "shall comply ... by permitting the Auditor and the Auditor's authorized representatives, during regular business hours, access to, examination of, and reproduction of City records." Charter status is no shield against a Government Code section 8546.7 audit, a holding for every public-agency client resisting state oversight.
AI & PRACTICE
On July 31, the court sanctioned attorney Ian G. Gottlieb and his firm after ChatGPT use during editing injected seven fake or erroneous citations into briefs in TOV Realty, LLC v. Suarez (SC 21183) and Kosel Equity, LLC v. MacGregor (SC 21184): $1,000 each from lawyer and firm, six extra CLE hours including three on generative AI, and a compliance report within six months. Quoting the federal decision Cojom v. Roblen, LLC, the order warns that submitting fake citations "is more than just sloppy lawyering: it imperils the integrity of our judicial process." The citations went bad during AI-assisted editing of real briefing, so verification duties attach at every stage of drafting, not just research.
In The JAAW Group, LLC (B-424433.22, decided July 31), GAO dismissed the protest, declined to sanction the protester for AI-generated citations to nonexistent decisions, then warned: "any future submissions of filings to our Office with citations to non-existent or wholly irrelevant authority may, after a review of the totality of the circumstances, result in the imposition of sanctions." The hallucination sanctions regime has reached the procurement forum. Circulate this to any team drafting protests with AI assistance.