Kwikset Corp. v. Superior Court

Bad Law
120 Cal. Rptr. 3d 741·2011 Cal. LEXIS 532·51 Cal. 4th 310·246 P.3d 877
Supreme Court of CaliforniaJanuary 27, 2011No. S171845California14,287 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Werdegar, J.

This case arises from Kwikset Corporation’s (Kwikset) manufacturing of locksets it labeled as “Made in U.S.A.” James Benson brought suit under the unfair competition and false advertising laws to challenge the labels’ veracity. After a bench trial, the trial court entered judgment for Benson.

While the case was pending on appeal, the electorate enacted Proposition 64 (Gen. Elec. (Nov. 2, 2004)), which called into question Benson’s standing to challenge Kwikset’s country of origin representations. Benson then filed an amended complaint in which he alleged he purchased Kwikset’s locksets and would not have done so but for the “Made in U.S.A.” labeling. The Court of Appeal concluded this allegation was insufficient to establish standing because it did not satisfy Proposition 64’s requirement that a plaintiff have “lost money or property.” (See Prop. 64, §§ 3, 5.)

*317 We granted review to address the standing requirements of the unfair competition and false advertising laws in the wake of Proposition 64. We conclude Proposition 64 should be read in light of its apparent purposes, i.e., to eliminate standing for those who have not engaged in any business dealings with…

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.