Rossi

Mobil Oil Corp. v. Rossi

Good Law
138 Cal. App. 3d 256·187 Cal. Rptr. 845·1982 Cal. App. LEXIS 2231
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaDecember 17, 1982Civ. 24670California3,476 words

Opinion

Opinion

Wiener, J.

Effective January 1, 1976, the Legislature added sections 20999 and 20999.1 to the Business and Professions Code to insure

competition and nondiscriminatory practices in the petroleum industry. (Stats. 1975, ch. 640, § 2, p. 1390; Sherwood and Packer, Review of Selected 1975 California Legislation (1976) 7 Pacific L.J. 237, 306.) Under section 20999.1, a petroleum distributor could no longer terminate a franchise with a gasoline dealer without “good cause.” “Good cause” is defined as the failure by the gasoline dealer to comply with essential and reasonable requirements of the franchise agreement, a failure to act in good faith in carrying out the terms of the franchise, or for other “legitimate business reasons.” (See fh. 1, ante.) A year later the Legislature amended Code of Civil Procedure section 1174, subdivision (a) to require a showing of good cause before a petroleum distributor could regain possession from a gasoline dealer through unlawful detainer proceedings. The good cause standards of section 20999.1 were expressly incorporated into this section, The question here is whether section 20999.1 and Code of Civil Procedure section 1174, subdivision (a) may be…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.