SHERSHER

SHERSHER v. Superior Court

Good Law
154 Cal. App. 4th 1491·2007 Cal. App. LEXIS 1492·65 Cal. Rptr. 3d 634
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaSeptember 10, 2007B195317California3,360 words

Opinion

Opinion

Kriegler, J.

The unfair competition law (UCL) authorizes a court to “make such orders ... as may be necessary to prevent the use or employment by any person of any practice which constitutes unfair competition, ... or as may be necessary to restore to any person in interest any money or property, real or personal, which may have been acquired by means of such unfair competition.” (Bus. & Prof. Code, § 17203.) California’s false advertising law (§ 17500 et seq.) contains similar language. (§ 17535.)

In this consumer action against Microsoft Corporation, respondent court granted Microsoft’s motion to strike plaintiff’s claim for restitution. Adopting Microsoft’s interpretation of certain language in Korea Supply Co. v. Lockheed Martin Corp. (2003) 29 Cal.4th 1134 [ 131 Cal.Rptr.2d 29 , 63 P.3d 937 ] (Korea Supply), respondent court held that the availability of restitution under the UCL was limited to direct purchasers and excluded plaintiffs such as the petitioner in this case, who purchased Microsoft’s product from a retailer. We conclude that respondent court’s ruling went beyond the holding in Korea Supply, which was that an individual private plaintiff in a tort action may not…

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.