We use cookies on this site to enable your digital experience. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our cookie policy. close

Mealey's California Section 17200

  • June 13, 2019

    Judge Holds UCL, Contract Claims Are Preempted By HOLA

    SAN FRANCISCO — After holding that borrowers’ claims for violation of California’s unfair competition law (UCL) and breach of contract were preempted by the Home Owners' Loan Act (HOLA), a California federal judge on June 11 granted a bank’s converted summary judgment motion and dismissed the claims (Lowell and Gina Smith, et al. v. Flagstar Bank, FSB, No. 18-05131, N.D. Calif., 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 98196).

  • June 12, 2019

    Federal Judge Remands Employee’s UCL, Wage Claims To California Court

    LOS ANGELES — A California federal judge on June 10 granted a former technology company employee’s request to remand a class action lawsuit in which he asserts wage-related claims and a cause of action for violation of California’s unfair competition law (UCL), holding that the damages sought did not meet the $5 million jurisdictional threshold for removal under the Class Action Fairness Act (CAFA) (Roger Flores v. Element Materials Technology Huntington Beach LLC, No. 19-932, C.D. Calif., 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 97165).

  • June 12, 2019

    Reinsurer, Affiliates Seek Dismissal Of Counterclaims In Workers’ Comp Dispute

    OMAHA, Neb. — A reinsurer and its affiliates moved to dismiss counterclaims on June 7 in their breach of contract dispute over a workers’ compensation program, telling a Nebraska federal court that the counterclaims “are a hodgepodge of conclusory allegations and unsupported assertions that fail to meet basic pleading standards” (Applied Underwriters Captive Risk Assurance Company Inc. v. Ramesh Pitamber & Kusum Pitamber, et al., No. 17-61, D. Neb.).

  • June 11, 2019

    Judge Refuses To Compel Arbitration Of Class Claims Against Lender

    SAN DIEGO — A California federal judge on June 10 denied a lender’s motion to compel arbitration of a lawsuit filed by borrowers who allege that the lender violated California’s unfair competition law (UCL) and Consumer Legal Remedies Act (CLRA), holding that an arbitration agreement waived public injunctive relief and was void (Cindy Delisle, et al. v. Speedy Cash, No. 3:18-CV-2042, S.D. Calif., 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 96981).

  • June 11, 2019

    Former Employee Says Job Was Terminated Based On Age, Sues In State Court 

    SAN FRANCISCO — A former manufacturing company employee on June 7 sued his former employer in a California court, alleging that it wrongfully terminated his employment based on his age and that it violated California’s unfair competition law (UCL) (Verne J. White v. Leviton Manufacturing Co., Inc., No. 576535, San Francisco Co.).

  • June 10, 2019

    Judge Refuses To Dismiss UCL, HBOR Claims Related To Loan Modifications

    SAN FRANCISCO — A California federal judge on June 3 dismissed certain class action claims asserted by borrowers against a bank in relation to its failure to provide them with loan modifications but held that they sufficiently stated claims for violations of California’s Homeowners Bill of Rights (HBOR) and unfair competition law (UCL) (Alicia Hernandez, et al. v. Wells Fargo & Company, et al., No. 18-07354, N.D. Calif., 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 93529).

  • June 5, 2019

    Borrowers Assert UCL, Other Claims In California Court, Seek Damages

    LOS ANGELES — Borrowers on May 24 sued a loan servicer and trustee in a California court, asserting claims for violations of the Truth In Lending Act (TILA), California’s unfair competition law (UCL) and other claims related to the handling of their loan modification application and the assignment of their loan (Ilanit Shoshan, et al. v. Bayview Loan Service LLC, et al., No. 19VECV00738, Calif. Super., Los Angeles Co.).

  • June 5, 2019

    1st Amendment Does Not Bar Claims Over Google Search Results, Judge Rules

    SAN FRANCISCO — Rejecting Google LLC’s argument that the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution shielded it from a client’s complaint over alleged unfair search results rankings, a California federal judge on June 5 denied in part the technology firm’s motion for judgment on the pleadings on unfair competition and breach of contract claims against it (Dreamstime.com LLC v. Google LLC, et al., No. 3;18-cv-01910, N.D. Calif.).

  • June 5, 2019

    App Developers Sue Apple Under Sherman Act For App Store Monopolization

    SAN JOSE, Calif. — Less than a month after the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that a class of consumers could pursue antitrust claims against Apple Inc. related to its App Store exclusivity practices, a pair of app developers filed similar claims against the technology giant in California federal court on June 4, alleging monopolization and unfair competition by restricting the sale and development of apps through developer contracts with exorbitant fees and commissions (Donald R. Cameron, et al. v. Apple Inc., No. 5:19-cv-03074, N.D. Calif.).

  • June 4, 2019

    Health Care Worker Files Class Complaint, Asserts UCL, Labor Code Violations

    OAKLAND, Calif. — After the recent dismissal of a class action complaint in which a health care professional asserted violations of the California Labor Code and unfair competition law (UCL) against a staffing company, the employee on May 28 filed an amended class action complaint to include allegations on expenses incurred when not working (Teresa Junkersfeld v. Per Diem Staffing Systems, Inc., No. 4:18-cv-07795, N.D. Calif., 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 88176).

  • June 3, 2019

    Panel Affirms Order Granting Anti-SLAPP Motion, Striking UCL Claim

    RIVERSIDE, Calif. — A California appeals court on May 31 affirmed a trial court’s decision granting a litigation support service company’s motion to strike a complaint under California's strategic lawsuit against public participation (anti-SLAPP)statute, holding that the court did not err in striking claims for violations of California’s unfair competition law (UCL) and intentional infliction of emotional distress because service of process is protected conduct under the anti-SLAPP statute (Stephen Harris v. Direct Legal Support, Inc., No. E067257, Cal. App., 4th Dist., Div. 2, 2019 Cal. App. Unpub. LEXIS 3766).

  • May 30, 2019

    Widower’s UCL, Other Claims Over Wife’s Ovarian Cancer Transferred To New Jersey

    TRENTON, N.J. — A complaint seeking damages and asserting claims for violations of California’s unfair competition law (UCL), negligence and other causes of action initially filed in California by the widower of a woman who died of ovarian cancer allegedly caused by Johnson & Johnson’s talcum powder products was transferred to New Jersey federal court on May 28 (Robert D. Tafoya v. Johnson & Johnson, et al., No. 3:19cv13023, D. N.J.).

  • May 29, 2019

    Federal Judge Dismisses UCL, Other Claims Against BMW As Time-Barred

    SAN DIEGO — After holding that a purchaser’s claims against a vehicle maker related to alleged extra oil consumption in his vehicle accrued in 2012, a California federal judge on May 28 held that his causes of action for violations of the Song-Beverly Consumer Warranty Act and California’s unfair competition law and a fraud claim were all barred by applicable statutes of limitations (Robert Smothers v. BMW of North America, LLC, No. 18-CV-1391, S.D. Calif., 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 89160).

  • May 28, 2019

    Judge Dismisses CRLA, UCL Claims Based On Vehicle Defect Caused By Rodents

    SACRAMENTO, Calif. — A California federal judge on May 24 dismissed class action claims for violations of the California Consumer Legal Remedies Act (CLRA) and unfair competition law (UCL) asserted by purchasers, who alleged that a vehicle maker should be held liable for damage caused by rats chewing on wiring in the vehicles during manufacturing and assembly, holding that they failed to show that the manufacturer had knowledge of the alleged wiring defect or were under a duty to disclose information (Melinda Espineli, et al. v. Toyota Motor Sales, U.S.A., Inc., et al., No. 2:17-cv-00698, E.D. Calif., 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 88203).

  • May 23, 2019

    Judge Dismisses UCL, HBOR Claims Against Servicer, Orders Sanctions

    SACRAMENTO, Calif. — A California federal judge on May 21 granted a loan servicer’s motion to dismiss a borrower’s claims for violations of California’s unfair competition law (UCL) and the Homeowners Bill of Rights (HBOR) and negligence related to a reverse mortgage, holding that the HBOR sections did not apply to the servicer and that the complaint lacked the reasonable particularity of facts to support a UCL claim (David Coltrin v. James B. Nutter & Company, No. 2:19-cv-00483, E.D. Calif., 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 85631).

  • May 21, 2019

    Panel Holds Court Erred In Ruling For Hyland’s On UCL Claim, Reverses

    PASADENA, Calif. — The Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals on May 15 affirmed a district court’s decision in favor of a homeopathic product maker on the majority of consumers’ claims but reversed the court’s decision as to a claim for violation of California’s unfair competition law (UCL), holding that a jury’s narrow findings as to deceptive advertising did not resolve a broader theory on unfair practices (Kim Allen, et al. v. Hylands, Inc., No. 17-56184, 9th Cir., 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 14391).

  • May 16, 2019

    Judge Holds Trade Secret, UCL Claims Could Succeed, Grants Injunction

    SAN DIEGO — After holding that internet lead generation companies will likely succeed on the merits of their claims for misappropriation of trade secrets and violation of California’s unfair competition law (UCL), a California federal judge on May 13 granted their request for a preliminary injunction enjoining competitors from using their trade secrets (Zeetogroup, LLC, et al. v. Nicholas Fiorentino, et al., No. 19-CV-458, S.D. Calif., 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 80648).

  • May 16, 2019

    Partial Dismissal In Suit Over Olive Oil Labeling Leaves Only CLRA Claim In Place

    OAKLAND, Calif. — A California federal judge on May 8 dismissed all but a California Consumer Legal Remedies Act (CLRA) claim by a consumer who brought a putative class complaint against the maker of oil that she alleges is falsely labeled as 100 percent extra virgin olive oil and granted leave to amend only a claim for negligent misrepresentation and a request for punitive damages (Shelly Robinson v. J.M. Smucker Company, No. 18-4654, N.D. Calif., 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 78069).

  • May 16, 2019

    Judge Dismisses UCL, FAL Claims Related To AARP’s Endorsement Of Policies

    LOS ANGELES — A California federal judge on May 14 granted a motion filed by insurers to dismiss claims for violations of California’s unfair competition law (UCL) and false advertising law (FAL) in relation to the marketing and endorsement of insurance policies, holding that they failed to meet the particularity requirements under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 9(b) and that an alleged implied representation on the endorsed products was not an actionable representation (Simon Levay, et al. v. AARP Inc., et al., No. 17-09041, C.D. Calif., 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 81338).

  • May 16, 2019

    Class Complaint Accuses Intuit Of Breaching Free Tax Filing Agreement With IRS

    SAN FRANCISCO — Intuit Inc., the maker of TurboTax software, breached its agreement with the Internal Revenue Service to offer a certain percentage of taxpayers the option to file their taxes for free by diverting customers to its paid products, three customers allege in a class complaint filed May 12 in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California (Brianna Sinohui, et al. v. Intuit Inc., No. 19-2546, N.D. Calif.).