Page 1
Page 2
Page 3
Page 4
Page 5
Page 6
Page 7
Page 8
Page 9
Page 10
Page 11
Page 12
Page 13
Page 14
Page 15
Page 16
Page 17
Page 18
Page 19
Page 20
Page 21
Page 22
Page 23
Page 24
Page 25
Page 26
Page 27
Page 28
Page 29
Page 30
Page 31
Page 32
Page 33
Page 34
Page 35
Page 36
Page 37
Page 38
Page 39
Page 40
Page 41
Page 42
Page 43
Page 44
Page 45
Page 46
Page 47
Page 48
Volume32013verdictgreensheetsvTORTSUNFAIRCOMPETITIONCONSUMERLAWUCLactionagainstinsurermayproceedsolongasitisbasedonallegedconductthatiswrongfulunderprinciplesindependentoftheUnfairInsurancePracticesAct.Zhangv.SuperiorCourt201357Cal.4th364.eplaintiinsuredclaimedthathisinsurerviolatedtheUnfairCompetitionLawUCLBusinessandProfessionsCodesection17200etseq.bypromisingtoprovidetimelycoverageintheeventofacompensablelosswhenitallegedlydidnotintendtopaythetruevalueofitsinsuredscoveredclaims.einsurercontendedplaintisclaimwasanimpermissibleattempttopleadaroundtheholdinginMoradi-Shalalv.FiremansFundIns.Companies198846Cal.3d287thataprivaterightofactioncouldnotbebasedonviolationoftheUnfairInsurancePracticesActUIPAInsuranceCodesection790etseq.eCaliforniaSupremeCourtheldthatwhileMoradi-ShalalbarsprivateactionsforviolationoftheUIPAincludingUCLclaimsdirectlybasedontheUIPAitdoesnotprecluderstpartyUCLactionsbasedongroundsindependentoftheUIPAevenwhentheinsurersconductmayalsoviolatetheUIPA.FraudandUnfairCompetitionLawclaimsagainstlendermayproperlybedismissediffraudispleadedwithinsufcientspecicityandnoindependentgroundforUCLliabilityisshown.Aspirasv.WellsFargoBankN.A.2013219Cal.App.4th948petitionforreviewpending.InthisactionforfraudnegligentmisrepresentationandunlawfulbusinesspracticesundertheUCLplaintis-allegedthatdefendantlenderdefraudedthembyclaimingitwouldholdoonforeclosurewhilethepartiesdiscussedloanmodication.etrialcourtsustaineddefendantsdemurreronthegroundplaintishadnotpleadedanyactionablerepresentationwithadequatespecicityinpartbecausetheonlyapparentmisrepresentationwasbyanunidentiedemployeewithoutconrmedauthoritytomakeanyrepresentationandplaintisappealedtheresultingdefensejudgment.eCourtofAppealFourthDist.Div.OneheldthepracticeofnegotiatingaloanmodicationwhilealsopursuingforeclosuredoesnotviolateanycommonlawdutyandalsodoesnotviolatetheUCLasthatpracticewillnotbebarredbylawuntilnewlegislationtakeseectonJanuary12018.Whereaplaintipredicatesaclaimofanunfairactorpracticeonpublicpolicyitisnotsucienttomerelyallegetheactviolatespublicpolicyorisimmoralunethicaloppressiveorunscrupulous.Citation.Ratherthiscourtonnumerousoccasionshasheldthattoestablishapracticeisunfairaplaintimustprovethedefendantsconductistetheredtoanunderlyingconstitutionalstatutoryorregulatoryprovisionorthatitthreatensanincipientviolationofanantitrustlaworviolatesthepolicyorspiritofanantitrustlaw.Finallythetrialcourtproperlyfoundplaintisfailedtosucientlyallegefraudwheretheirclaimswerebasedonacallwithanunnamedpersonwhoseauthoritywasinquestion.SeealsoSchlegelv.WellsFargoBankNA9thCir.2013720F.3d1204borrowersunsuccessfullysuedabankundertheFairDebtCollectionPracticesActforsendingmortgagedefaultnoticesdespitetheexistenceofaloanmodicationagreementthebankprincipalbusinesswasnotdebtcollectionsoitdidnotqualifyasadebtcollectorundertheAct.HowevertheborrowerscouldpursueaclaimundertheEqualCreditOpportunityActsnoticerequirementbecausewithrespecttothebanksallegedaccelerationoftheborrowersdebttheborrowerscomplaintplausiblyallegesthatthebankannulledrepealedrescindedorcanceledtheirrighttodeferrepaymentoftheirloanconstitutingarevocationofcreditwithinthestatutorydenitionofadverseactiontriggeringthedutytoprovideastatementofreasonsfortheactionincontrastsendingamistakendefaultnoticewouldnotnecessarilyconstituteanadverseactionCompareChapmanv.SkypeInc.2013220Cal.App.4th217SecondDist.Div.reetrialcourterredinsustainingdemurrerinUCLandCLRAactionbasedonallegationsthatdefendantadvertisedacallingplanasunlimitedwheninfacttheplanswerelimitedastothenumberofminutesperdayandmonthandthenumberofcallsperdayAtrieroffactcouldndthatthatconsumersarelikelytobelievethatSkypesUnlimitedUSCanadaitalicsaddedcallingplanoersunlimitedcallingwithintheUnitedStatesandCanadaforaxedmonthlyfeeandthattheywillfailtonoticethedisclosuretothecontraryinthefairusagepolicythatwasreferencedinafootnoteonawebpage.MoreoveratrieroffactcouldinferUCLcausationactualreliancebasedonallegationsthattherepresentationwasmaterialtothedecisiontopurchasetheplanSeealsoRosev.BankofAmericaN.A.201357Cal.4th390CaliforniaSupremeCourtaprivateactionalleginganunlawfulbusinesspracticeunderCaliforniasUnfairCompetitionLawmaybebasedonallegedviolationsofafederalstatuteevenwhereCongresshasrepealedaprovisionofthatstatuteauthorizingcivilactionsfordamagessolongasCongressmadeitplainthatstatelawsconsistentwiththefederalstatutearenotsupersededSeealsoAngelicaTextileServicesInc.v.Park2013220Cal.App.4th495petitionforreviewpendingFourthDist.Div.OnetrialcourterredinsummarilyrejectingplaintiemployersclaimsthatitsformeremployeebreachedhisemploymentagreementandhisdutyofloyaltywheretheemployeeallegedlydisparagedtheemployertoalocalbusinessandtookactionsthatresultedincustomerstakingtheirbusinesstoemployeesnewemployertheseclaimsaswellasemployersclaimthatemployeewronglyretaineddocumentsbelongingtoemployerwerenotdisplacedbytheUniformTradeSecretsActonwhichtheemployerlostattrialastheallegationssupportedtheoriesindependentofanytradesecretSeealsoPeoplev.PersolveLLC2013218Cal.App.4th1267FihDist.trialcourterroneouslysustainedademurrerinthispublicenforcementactionundertheUCLallegingdefendantscontinuedonpageviVoume32013erictgreenseetsTRTNFAIRMPETITINNMERLAWULactionagainstinsurermayproceedsoongastsaseonaegeconucttatswrongfulunderprinciplesindependentofthenfirInrnPriA.Zhangv.SuperiorCourt201357Cal.4th364.eplaintiinsuredclaimedthathisinsurerviolatedtheUnfairompetitionLawUCLBusinessandProfessionsCodesection17200etseq.bypromisingtoprovidetimelycoverageintheeventofacompensablelosswhenitallegedlydidnotintendtopaythetruevalueofitsinsuredscoveredclaims.einsurercontendedplaintisclaimwasanimpermissibleattempttopleadaroundtheholdinginMoradi-Shalalv.FiremansFundIns.Companies198846Cal.3d287thataprivaterihtofactioncouldnotbebasedonviolationoftheUnfairInsurancePracticesActUIPAInsuranceodesection790etseq.eCaliforniaSupremeCourtheldthatwhileMoradi-ShalalbarsprivateactionsforviolationoftheUIPAincludinUCLclaimsdirectlybasedontheUIPAitdoesnotprecluderstpartyUCLactionsbasedonroundsindependentoftheUIPAevenwhentheinsurersconductmayalsoviolatetheUIPA.FraudandUnfairometitionLawclaimsagainstlendermayproperlybedismissediffraudispleadedwithinsufcientspecicityandnoindependentgroundforULliabilityiswn.Aspirasv.WellsFargoBankN.A.2013219Cal.App.4th948petitionforreviewpending.InthisactionforfraudnelientmisrepresentationandunlawfulbusinesspracticesundertheUCLplaintis-alleedthatdefendantlenderdefraudedthembyclaiminitwouldholdoonforeclosurewhilethepartiesdiscussedloanmodication.etrialcourtsustaineddefendantsdemurreronthegroundplaintishadnotpleadedanyactionablerepresentationwithadequatespecicityinpartbecausetheonlyapparentmisrepresentationwasbyanunidentiedemployeewithoutconrmedauthoritytomakeanyrepresentationandplaintisappealedtheresultingdefensejudgment.eCourtofAppealFourthDist.Div.OneheldthepracticeofnegotiatingaloanmodicationwhilealsopursuingforeclosuredoesnotviolateanycommonlawdutyandalsodoesnotviolatetheUCLasthatpracticewillnotbebarredbylawuntilnewlegislationtakeseectonJanuary12018.Whereaplaintipredicatesaclaimofanunfairactorpracticeonpublicpolicyitisnotsucienttomerelyallegetheactviolatespublicpolicyorisimmoralunethicaloppressiveorunscrupulous.Citation.Ratherthiscourtonnumerousoccasionshasheldthattoestablishapracticeisunfairaplaintimustprovethedefendantsconductistetheredtoanunderlyingconstitutionalstatutoryorregulatoryprovisionorthatitthreatensanincipientviolationofanantitrustlaworviolatesthepolicyorspiritofanantitrustlaw.Finallythetrialcourtproperlyfoundplaintisfailedtosucientlyallegefraudwheretheirclaimswerebasedonacallwithanunnamedpersonwhoseauthoritywasinquestion.SeelsoSchlegelv.WellsFargoBankNA9thCir.2013720F.3d1204borrowersunsuccessfullysuedabankundertheFairDebtCollectionPracticesActforsendingmortgagedefaultnoticesdespitetheexistenceofaloanmodicationagreementthebankprincipalbusinesswasnotdebtcollectionsoitdidnotqualifyasadebtcollectorundertheAct.HowevertheborrowerscouldpursueaclaimundertheEqualCreditOpportunityActsnoticerequirementbecausewithrespecttothebanksallegedaccelerationoftheborrowersdebttheborrowerscomplaintplausiblyallegesthatthebankannulledrepealedrescindedorcanceledtheirrighttodeferrepaymentoftheirloanconstitutingarevocationofcreditwithinthestatutorydenitionofadverseactiontriggeringthedutytoprovideastatementofreasonsfortheactionincontrastsendingamistakendefaultnoticewouldnotnecessarilyconstituteanadverseactionCompareChapmanv.SkypeInc.2013220Cal.App.4th17SecondDist.Div.reetrialcourterredinsustainindemurrerinUCLandCLRAactionbasedonalleationsthatdefendantadvertisedacallinplanasunlimitedwheninfacttheplanswerelimitedastothenumberofminutesperdayandmonthandthenumberofcallsperdayAtrieroffactcouldndthatthatconsumersarelikelytobelievethatSkypesUnlimitedUSCanadaitalicsaddedcallinplanoersunlimitedcallinwithintheUnitedStatesandCanadaforaxedmonthlyfeeandthattheywillfailtonoticethedisclosuretothecontraryinthefairusaepolicythatwasreferencedinafootnoteonawebpae.MoreoveratrieroffactcouldinferUCLcausationactualreliancebasedonalleationsthattherepresentationwasmaterialtothedecisiontopurchasetheplanSeealsoRosev.BankofAmericaN.A.201357Cal.4th390CaliforniaSupremeCourtaprivateactionalleinanunlawfulbusinesspracticeunderCaliforniasUnfairCompetitionLawmaybebasedonalleedviolationsofafederalstatuteevenwhereConresshasrepealedaprovisionofthatstatuteauthorizincivilactionsfordamaessolonasCongressmadeitplainthatstatelawsconsistentwiththefederalstatutearenotsupersededSeelsoAngelicaTextileServicesInc.v.Park2013220Cal.App.4th495petitionforreviewpendingFourthDist.Div.OnetrialcourterredinsummarilyrejectingplaintiemployersclaimsthatitsformeremployeebreachedhisemploymentagreementandhisdutyofloyaltywheretheemployeeallegedlydisparagedtheemployertoalocalbusinessandtookactionsthatresultedincustomerstakingtheirbusinesstoemployeesnewemployertheseclaimsaswellasemployersclaimthatemployeewronglyretaineddocumentsbelongingtoemployerwerenotdisplacedbytheUniformTradeSecretsActonwhichtheemployerlostattrialastheallegationssupportedtheoriesindependentofanytradesecretSeelsoPeoplev.PersolveLL2013218Cal.App.4th1267FihDist.trialcourterroneouslysustainedademurrerinthispublicenforcementactionundertheUCLallegingdefendantscontnueonpagev