Madrid

Madrid v. Perot Systems Corp.

Good Law
130 Cal. App. 4th 440·2005 Cal. App. LEXIS 980·2005 Daily Journal DAR 7323·30 Cal. Rptr. 3d 210·2005 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 5346
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMay 26, 2005C046683California8,449 words

Opinion

Opinion

Sims, J.

Plaintiff Art Madrid seeks to pursue a class action lawsuit on behalf of California electricity customers, against parties involved in restructuring California’s electricity market, who allegedly engaged in unlawful business practices in violation of the unfair competition law (UCL) (Bus. & Prof. Code, § 17200 et seq. ). Plaintiff appeals from a judgment of dismissal following the sustaining of demurrers to his complaint against defendants Perot Systems Corporation (Perot), California Independent System Operator (ISO), Terry Winter (president and corporate executive officer of ISO), and Paul Gribik, a Perot associate. Plaintiff argues he alleged viable UCL claims. We disagree. As we shall explain, damages are not recoverable under the UCL, and plaintiff has alleged no viable theory upon which he could obtain restitution or injunctive relief. We shall therefore affirm the judgment.

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

In June 2002, plaintiff filed in San Diego County a class action lawsuit against Perot, ISO, and Winter. Gribik was brought in as a Doe defendant in June 2003. The complaint alleged UCL violations. It also alleged other counts, which we need not address…

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.