Trinkle

Trinkle v. California State Lottery

Good Law
1999 Cal. App. LEXIS 441·71 Cal. App. 4th 1198·84 Cal. Rptr. 2d 496
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaApril 6, 1999C029083California2,203 words

Opinion

Opinion

Callahan, J.

Plaintiff John Trinkle sought “restitution of and disgorgement of profits” earned by the California State Lottery (CSL) on the theory that CSL engaged in unfair business competition (Bus. & Prof. Code, § 17200 et seq.) by operating the “illegal” games of Keno and Scratcher. The trial court sustained CSL’s demurrer without leave to amend. Trinkle appeals.

We conclude that the CSL, a state agency, is not a “person” within the meaning of California’s unfair competition law and that statutory governmental immunity protects CSL from suit on the facts alleged. We will therefore affirm the judgment.

Background

Since this is an appeal following an order sustaining a demurrer, we summarize and accept as true all well-pleaded material allegations of the complaint. (Hensler v. City of Glendale (1994) 8 Cal.4th 1, 8, fn. 3 [ 32 Cal.Rptr.2d 244 , 876 P.2d 1043 ]; Shoemaker v. Myers (1990) 52 Cal.3d 1, 7 [ 276 Cal.Rptr. 303 , 801 P.2d 1054 , 20 A.L.R.5th 1016 ].)

Plaintiff John Trinkle (Trinkle) is the owner of a partnership known as Galaxy Vending (Galaxy). Galaxy is in the business of operating vending and amusement machines located in bars and similar establishments. Galaxy pays…

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.