Balsam
Balsam v. Trancos, Inc.
Opinion
Lead Opinion
Margulies, J.
Defendant Trancos, Inc. (Trancos), appeals from a judgment awarding statutory damages and attorney fees to plaintiff Daniel L. Balsam under Business and Professions Code 1 section 17529 et seq. (Anti-spam Law). Balsam cross-appeals from portions of the judgment denying him relief under the Consumers Legal Remedies Act, Civil Code section 1750 et seq. (CLRA), and finding Trancos’s chief executive officer (CEO), Brian Nelson, not personally liable for the judgment along with Trancos. We affirm the judgment in all respects.
I. BACKGROUND
Balsam filed suit against Trancos, Nelson, and other individuals and entities 2 in April 2008, alleging causes of action for (1) violations of section 17529.5, 3 (2) violations of the CLRA, and (3) declaratory relief as to the legality of defendants’ actions under these statutes.
A court trial commenced on October 14, 2009. At the outset of the trial, the court ruled Balsam lacked standing to sue under the CLRA because he was not a “consumer” of any goods or services as defined in Civil Code section 1761, subdivision (d) and he did not sustain any damages caused by defendants’ conduct as required by Civil Code section 1780. The court…