In Clayworth v. Pfizer, Inc., ___ Cal.4th ____ (2010), the California Supreme Court held that, to have standing to seek an injunction, the plaintiff need not have suffered a restitutionary loss: The Court of Appeal held Pharmacies were barred from seeking injunctive relief because, it concluded, they had suffered no monetary loss. To the extent this holding rests on the… Read More
In Davis v. Ford Credit, 2009 WL 3859327 (2009), the California Court of Appeal in Los Angeles held that Ford Credit’s practice of applying a payment to past-due installments first, rather than to the current monthly installment, did not violate the Rees-Levering Automobile Sales Finance Act’s ban on late-fee pyramiding. (Civ. Code, § 2982(k).) The facts of the case were as… Read More
In Tietsworth v. Sears, Roebuck and Co., 2009 WL 3320486 (N.D.Cal. 2009), Judge Fogel explained, As a threshold matter, the parties disagree with respect to whether Plaintiffs' UCL and CLRA claims are subject to the heightened pleading requirements of Rule 9(b). This issue was addressed by the Ninth Circuit in Kearns v. Ford Motor Co., 567 F.3d 1120 (9th… Read More
In Kearns v. Ford Motor Company, --- F.3d ----, 2009 WL 1578535 (9th Cir. 2009), the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit applied the heighted pleading standing of FRCP 9(b) for CLRA and UCL claims, rather than the looser state law pleading standard for causes of action arising under such statutes, even if the case arose from one removed… Read More
We previously reported here on the California Supreme Court's landmark B&P 17200 decision, Tobacco II. A petition for rehearing was filed on June 2, 2009, a copy of which can be found here. The answer will be due next week, with a ruling by the Supreme Court shortly thereafter. Read More
In In re: Jamster Marketing Litigation, 2009 WL 1456632 (S.D.Cal. 2009), Judge Miller ruled on whether a Wireless Provider could be held vicariously liable under the CLRA and UCL for alleged misleading advertising by Content Providers. While a bit far afield from auto finance, the point of law is pertinent as to whether defendants sued under such legal theories may… Read More
In Clark v. Superior Court, --- Cal.Rptr.3d ----, 2009 WL 1414903 (2009), the Court of Appeal for the Second District was asked to decide the following question: Civil Code section 3345 (section 3345) authorizes the award of an enhanced remedy-up to three times greater than the amount of a fine, civil penalty “or any other remedy the purpose or… Read More
The California Supreme Court issued a landmark B&P Code 17200 case today in In re: Tobacco II Cases. How these rules affect auto finance class actions remains to be seen. The holding of the decision was as follows: On review, we address two questions: First, who in a UCL class action must comply with Proposition 64's standing requirements, the class… Read More
In Kwikset Corp. v. Superior Court, __ Cal.App.4th __ (2009), the Fourth District Court of Appeal denied relief under the UCL for a party who purchased Kwikset locks but claimed it was misled by Kwikset's "Made in U.S.A. label". The Court of Appeal stated: Absent a showing of some complaint about the cost, quality, or operation of the mislabeled locksets… Read More
In Gerber v. Citigroup, Inc. 2009 WL 248094 (E.D.Cal.2009), District Judge Moulds followed the Southern District's opinion in Sial v. Unifund CCR Partners, 2008 WL 4079281 (S.D.Cal.Aug.28, 2008), and rejected both the Norr-Pennington doctrine and the litigation privilege as defenses to a Rosenthal Act claim. This court is unpersuaded that the Noerr-Pennington doctrine bars actions under the FDCPA. Rather, this court finds… Read More
In Paduano v. American Honda Motor Co., Inc. (2009) 2009 WL 57806, the California Court of Appeal held that Federal law (the Energy Policy and Conservation Act) specifying the use of EPA estimates of mileage preempts breach of warranty claims based on a Hybrid vehicle's failure to achieve EPA mileage estimates. However, the EPCA did not preempt claims under the CLRA and… Read More
In Coordinated Automobile Lease Tax Cases (L.A.Sup. Coord. No. JCCP 4378), Judge Anthony Mohr presided over litigation involving whether automobile leases and the holders of such contracts properly assessed use taxes on such items as acquisition fees and service contracts. On April 9, 2008, Judge Mohr sustained the demurrers of the various automobile finance companies without leave to amend, holding… Read More
