Stevens

Stevens v. Superior Court

Good Law
75 Cal. App. 4th 594·89 Cal. Rptr. 2d 370
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaOctober 18, 1999B122526, B122539California5,448 words

Opinion

Opinion

Aldrich, J.

Introduction

We are asked in this case to resolve whether a plaintiff, on behalf of the general public, may state a claim under the Unfair Competition Act (Bus. & Prof. Code, § 17200, hereinafter, the UCA), for the violation of provisions of the Insurance Code and the California Code of Regulations, which require that insurance agents, brokers, and automobile dealers be licensed to transact insurance. We hold that the UCA allows, and neither section 1631 of the Insurance Code, nor California Code of Regulations, title 10, section 2110 et seq. (hereinafter title 10, section 2110), bars actions brought by private plaintiffs under the UCA for violations of these licensing requirements. We further hold that while restitution is available under the UCA as the applicable remedy, plaintiff has not properly pled restitution. While such causes of action may be stated, the operative complaints here are deficient, and so leave to amend the complaints should have been granted. Accordingly, we reverse the trial court’s ruling and grant the writ petition.

Factual and Procedural Background

Charles Stevens (Stevens), who was an uninsured driver and who purchased insurance under the…

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.