Appellant investor challenged a decision of the Superior Court of Orange County (California), which denied his motion to certify his action against respondent securities brokers as a statewide class action for violations of Cal. Civ. Code § 1770(a)(14), (19) of the California Consumer Legal Remedies Act, and the California Unfair Competition Law, Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code § 17200 et seq., and as a nationwide class action for breach of contract.
Overview
The investor brought an action for damages he allegedly incurred when his access to his Norway salmon stock trading service was suspended without notice. The trial court refused to certify the investor’s action as a class action. On appeal, the court affirmed. A class action was inappropriate under Cal. Civ. Code § 1781 regarding the investor’s claim of a violation of Cal. Civ. Code § 1770(a)(14), (19). The language of Cal. Civ. Code § 1780(a)(1) did not create an automatic award of statutory damages upon proof of an unlawful act, as relief was limited to those who suffered damages, and in this case, the issues involved each potential class member’s entitlement to damages. Because each class member would have been required to litigate numerous factually unique questions to determine his individual right to recover, class action was not proper. A class action was also inappropriate under Cal. Code Civ. Proc. § 382 for the California Unfair Competition Law claim. There was substantial evidence that individual issues would have predominated over the common ones. The trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying certification of a nationwide class on the claim for breach of contract.
Outcome
The court affirmed.