For reprint rights or to purchase a copy of your Daily Journal photo, email jeremy@reprintpros.com for prices or call 949-702-5390.

To buy more copies, call 866-531-1492 or email subscribe@dailyjournal.com
This is the property of the Daily Journal Corporation and fully protected by copyright. It is made available only to Daily Journal subscribers for personal or collaborative purposes and may not be distributed, reproduced, modified, stored or transferred without written permission. Please click "Reprint" to order presentation-ready copies to distribute to clients or use in commercial marketing materials or for permission to post on a website. and copyright (showing year of publication) at the bottom.
Subscribe to the Daily Journal for access to Daily Appellate Reports, Verdicts, Judicial Profiles and more...
Daily appellate reports
Sign up for Daily Journal emails
    Filter by date
     to 
    Search by Case Name
    Search by Judge
    Search by Case Number
    Search by DJ Citation Number
    Search by Category
    Search by Court
Name Category Published
Pulliam v. HNL Automotive, Inc.
In a consumer action against a car dealership, the "holder rule" did not limit the award of attorney's fees where the buyer sought fees from a holder under a state prevailing party statute. 		Consumer Law CASC May 27, 2022
Consumer Financial Protection Bureau v. Cashcall, Inc.
District court clearly erred in imposing lower penalties against a lending company because the danger that the company's conduct violated the Consumer Financial Protection Act was so obvious it must have been aware of it. 		Consumer Law 9th May 24, 2022
Gross v. CitiMortgage, Inc.
Mortgage holder was liable under the Fair Credit Reporting Act for indicating that a mortgage was past-due when it had been discharged by operation of law. 		Consumer Law 9th May 17, 2022
Bowser v. Ford Motor Company
A class member who opts out of the lawsuit is not a party to that lawsuit for the purposes of admitting depositions from the class action in a later, individual suit against the same defendant. 		Consumer Law 4DCA/2 May 13, 2022
Modification: People v. Johnson & Johnson
Substantial evidence did not support the trial court's finding that companies' oral marketing communications about their pelvic mesh products were likely to deceive doctors. 		Consumer Law 4DCA/1 Apr. 29, 2022
People v. Johnson & Johnson
Substantial evidence did not support the trial court's finding that companies' oral marketing communications about their pelvic mesh products were likely to deceive doctors. 		Consumer Law 4DCA/1 Apr. 13, 2022
Modification: Lee v. Amazon.com, Inc.
The trial court erred in finding Amazon immune from liability, by virtue of the Communications Decency Act, for failure to provide Proposition 65 warnings on face creams containing mercury and sold by third parties. 		Consumer Law 1DCA/2 Apr. 11, 2022
Rodriguez v. FCA US, LLC
California's Lemon Law's new motor vehicle refund-or-replace provision did not apply to previously owned vehicle sold with a balance remaining on one of the manufacturer's express warranties. 		Consumer Law 4DCA/2 Apr. 8, 2022
Reyes v. Beneficial State Bank
The Holder Rule does not preempt states from authorizing recovery of attorney's fees beyond what the Holder Rule ordinarily allows. 		Consumer Law 5DCA Mar. 24, 2022
DeNike v. Mathew Enterprise, Inc.
After ruling car dealership's pretrial offer of correction was reasonable and appropriate, the trial court erred in allowing plaintiff's claim for restitution under the Consumers Legal Remedies Act to proceed. 		Consumer Law 6DCA Mar. 18, 2022
Lee v. Amazon.com, Inc.
The trial court erred in finding Amazon immune from liability, by virtue of the Communications Decency Act, for failure to provide Proposition 65 warnings on face creams containing mercury and sold by third parties. 		Consumer Law 1DCA/2 Mar. 15, 2022
Tailford v. Experian Information Solutions
Under the Fair Credit Reporting Act, information credit reporting agencies are mandated to provide consumers does not include behavioral data or other information not enumerated in Section 1681(g) of the Act. 		Consumer Law 9th Mar. 2, 2022
Moran v. The Screening Pros
A credit reporting agency was not negligent because its interpretation of the Fair Credit Reporting Act, while ultimately incorrect, was not objectively unreasonable. 		Consumer Law 9th Feb. 9, 2022
Anderson v. Ford Motor Co.
Recovery of Song-Beverly Act civil penalty did not preclude plaintiffs' recovery of punitive damages for fraud because the awards were based on separate conduct that took place at different times. 		Consumer Law 3DCA Feb. 9, 2022
Melendez v. Westlake Services, Inc.
Federal Trade Commission's Holder Rule allows for the recovery of attorney fees from not just the seller, but also the creditor-assignee. 		Consumer Law 2DCA/8 Jan. 31, 2022
Duff v. Jaguar Land Rover North America, LLC
Determining who was the prevailing party for fee-shifting purposes in breach of implied warranty suit should have been based on the extent to which the buyer achieved his litigation objectives. 		Consumer Law 4DCA/1 Jan. 28, 2022
Sellers v. JustAnswer LLC
Through their websites' design, website providers must ensure consumers are adequately notified of contractual terms they are agreeing to by making those terms clear and conspicuous. 		Consumer Law 4DCA/1 Jan. 4, 2022
BBBB Bonding Corp. v. Caldwell
Cosigner of a bail bond premium financing agreement was entitled to notice about the risks of guaranteeing such an agreement because it qualified as a consumer credit contract. 		Consumer Law 1DCA/1 Dec. 30, 2021
Cohen v. ConAgra Brands, Inc.
Because preemption is an affirmative defense, defendant must establish that preemption is valid through pleadings and supporting documents. 		Consumer Law 9th Oct. 27, 2021
Loyhayem v. Fraser Financial & Insurance Services
Telephone Consumer Protection Act prohibits any robocalls to cell phones, not just those for advertising or telemarketing purposes. 		Consumer Law 9th Aug. 11, 2021
Moore v. Trader Joe's
No deceptive marketing where other available information about product would flag reasonable consumer that product is not 100 percent as stated. 		Consumer Law 9th Jul. 16, 2021
Federal Communications Commission v. Prometheus Radio Project
Federal Communications Commission's decision to repeal ownership rules based on imperfect data was not arbitrary or capricious for purposes of Administrative Procedure Act. 		Consumer Law USSC Apr. 2, 2021
Manikan v. Peters & Freedman LLP
Debtors are precluded from bringing Fair Debt Collection Practices Act claims premised on bankruptcy discharge order, but plaintiff's claim was not precluded because his debt was fully paid before discharge. 		Consumer Law 9th Nov. 27, 2020
Marino v. Ocwen Loan Servicing
Summary judgment in favor of mortgage servicer who obtained consumers' credit report following bankruptcy discharge was proper because they had permissible reasons to obtain reports. 		Consumer Law 9th Oct. 21, 2020
Modification: Ramos v. Mercedes-Benz USA, LLC
Buyer may not obtain restitution of new vehicle's full price, where manufacturer failed to complete repairs within 30 days, but defect did not substantially impair vehicle's use, value or safety. 		Consumer Law 2DCA/8 Oct. 5, 2020
Ramos v. Mercedes-Benz USA, LLC
Buyer may not obtain restitution of new vehicle's full price, where manufacturer failed to complete repairs within 30 days, but defect did not substantially impair vehicle's use, value or safety. 		Consumer Law 2DCA/8 Oct. 2, 2020
Moore v. Mars Petcare US
Under reasonable consumer test, plaintiffs sufficiently alleged that sale of prescription pet food exclusively through vets or with veterinarian approval was a deceptive practice. 		Consumer Law 9th Jul. 29, 2020
Kirzhner v. Mercedes-Benz USA, LLC
Vehicle registration renewal and nonoperation fees are not recoverable as collateral charges under Song-Beverly Consumer Warranty Act, but they are recoverable as incidental damages. 		Consumer Law CASC Jul. 28, 2020
Farrell v. Boeing Employees Credit Union
Appellant's federal wages were properly garnished under California garnishment order because it was properly served on appellant's employer and appellant remained employee when appellant moved in between states. 		Consumer Law 9th Jul. 17, 2020
American Chemistry Council v. Office of Environmental Health etc.
In absence of contrary evidence, the court must presume Carcinogen Identification Committee properly carried out its obligation and followed its own guidance criteria. 		Consumer Law 3DCA Jul. 13, 2020
By using our website, you agree to our use of cookies in accordance with our cookie policy. You can learn more about how we use cookies by reviewing our Privacy Policy here.