Case Summaries

Case Summaries

Consumer Protection

[05/11] Dreher v. Experian Information Solutions
In an appeal of a class action judgment, hinging on whether the decision of credit reporter-defendant to list a defunct credit card company, rather than the name of its servicer, as a 'source of . . . information' on an individual?s credit report -- without more -- creates sufficient injury in fact under the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) for purposes of Article III standing, 15 U.S.C. section 1681g(a)(2), the district court's judgment in favor of plaintiffs is vacated where when an individual fails to allege a concrete injury stemming from allegedly incomplete or incorrect information listed on a credit report, he or she cannot satisfy the threshold requirements of constitutional standing.

[05/10] Pyskaty v. Wide World of Cars, LLC
In an action arising out of plaintiff's purchased of a purportedly defective 'certified pre?owned' BMW from auto dealer-defendant, alleging violations of the Magnuson?Moss Warranty--Federal Trade Commission Act (MMWA), 15 U.S.C. section 2301 et seq., and New York State law, the district court's dismissal of the amended complaint -- on grounds that the value of plaintiff's MMWA claims did not amount to $50,000 and that she could neither amend her complaint to add a claim for punitive damages under the MMWA, nor rely on the value of her state?law claims, to meet the jurisdictional threshold -- is reversed where the value of plaintiff's MMWA claims, as pled, exceeds $50,000.

[05/08] Ford Motor Warranty Cases
In a petition for writ of mandate in an underlying Code of Civil Procedure section 404.1 coordination action involving 470 civil cases, alleging Ford breached warranties with respect to cars equipped with the DPS6 transmission, and in which the coordination judge refused to add to the coordination proceeding 467 substantively indistinguishable cases in the same counties, the petition is granted where: 1) a trial judge's order declining to add cases to a coordination proceeding, like the coordination motion judge's original order, is subject to our independent review; and 2) the trial court erred in refusing to add the cases to the proceeding.

[04/06] McGill v. Citibank
In a dispute between a consumer and a credit card company involving the validity of a provision in a predispute arbitration agreement that waives the right to seek the statutory remedy of public injunctive relief in any forum, the Court of Appeals' decision is reversed where: 1) such a provision is contrary to California public policy and is thus unenforceable under California law; and 2) the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA), 9 U.S.C. section 1 et seq. does not preempt this rule of California law or require enforcement of the waiver provision.

Read More

Injury & Tort Law

[05/19] Van Audenhove v. Perry
In a suit for malicious prosecution, alleging that defendant contacted the police and falsely accused plaintiff of stalking, and that the police arrested him, but the district attorney's office ultimately declined to prosecute, the trial court's judgment sustaining a demurrer and dismissing the action is affirmed where the complaint failed to allege a prosecution, as required for a claim of malicious prosecution.

[05/18] Gillotti v. Stewart
In a construction defect law suit by a homeowner, the trial court's judgment and post-trial orders denying motions for new trial or judgment notwithstanding the verdict (JNOV) and ordering plaintiff to pay defendant's expert witness fees due to plaintiff not obtaining a judgment more favorable that defendant's settlement offer, Code Civ. Proc. section 998, are affirmed where plaintiff fails to show any basis for reversal.

[05/18] Petras v. Simparel Inc.
In suit alleging a reverse False Claims Act (FCA) claim against plaintiff's former employer, contending that defendants knowingly and improperly avoided a contingent obligation to pay accrued dividends to an investing entity after the entity had been placed into receivership and was being operated by the SBA, the district court's dismissal of the first and second amended complaint is affirmed where under the FCA provision?s plain language, the defendants could not have knowingly and improperly avoided or decreased an obligation to pay the accrued dividends at the time of their alleged misconduct because the obligation did not yet exist; and 2) even if the SBA qualified as the Government for purposes of plaintiff's FCA action, the reverse FCA claim would still be dismissed.

[05/16] US ex rel. Badr v. Triple Canopy, Inc.
In a qui tam suit on remand from the United States Supreme Court, the prior Court of Appeals' decision is affirmed where, applying Universal Health Services, Inc. v. US ex rel. Escobar, 136 S.Ct. 1989 (2016), the Government has stated a claim under the False Claims Act (FCA), 31 U.S.C. section 3729(a) against defendant.

Read More