Consumer Advocacy Group, Inc. v. ExxonMobil Corp.

Good Law
168 Cal. App. 4th 675·2008 Cal. App. LEXIS 2279·86 Cal. Rptr. 3d 39·39 Envtl. L. Rep. (Envtl. Law Inst.) 20285
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaNovember 20, 2008B201245California7,324 words

Opinion

Opinion

Epstein, J.

This appeal arises from a private enforcement action under an initiative measure, the Safe Drinking Water and Toxic Enforcement Act of 1986 (the Act), commonly referred to as “Proposition 65.” The Act is codified in Health and Safety Code section 25249.5 et seq. Plaintiff and appellant Consumer Advocacy Group, Inc. (CAG), appeals from the entry of summary judgment in favor of defendant and respondent ExxonMobil Corporation. The trial court based its judgment on the doctrine of res judicata. Because the issues in this action are not identical to those resolved in the prior action, we conclude the trial court erred in granting full summary judgment based on res judicata. We reverse the judgment and remand the matter to the trial court for further proceedings.

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL SUMMARY

CAG is a private nonprofit organization. It describes its mission as protecting the public from, and educating the public about, harmful products and business practices. In order to promote its goals, CAG acts as a private enforcer of the Act, bringing lawsuits against businesses it believes to be in violation of sections 25249.5 and 25249.6. The statutory scheme allows enforcement…

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.