Progressive West Insurance Company v. Simon H. Preciado

Good Law
479 F.3d 1014·2007 WL 725717·2007 U.S. App. LEXIS 5190
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMarch 6, 200706-17367California1,951 words

Opinion

Opinion

Ikuta, J.

This appeal raises the question whether the Class Action Fairness Act (“CAFA”), Pub.L. No. 109-2, § 5 , 119 Stat. 12 (2005), gives the federal district court removal jurisdiction over this action. We conclude that it does not, and affirm the district court.

Factual and Procedural Background

On December 22, 2004, Progressive West Insurance Company (“Progressive”) filed a breach of contract action in California state court against its insured, Simon Preciado. Progressive sought $5,000 in reimbursement for medical payments it made on behalf of Preciado. On February 17, 2005, Preciado filed a cross-complaint against Progressive, which alleged (among other things) that Progressive’s policy of claiming such reimbursements was an unfair business practice under California’s unfair competition law, California Business and Professions Code § 17200 et seq. Pre-ciado sought remedies “on behalf of the general public” for these unfair business practices but failed to allege the elements of a class action necessary to bring a representative claim under California’s unfair competition law. See Cal. Bus. & PROF. Code § 17203 (West 2005). On August 7, 2006, the state trial court granted Preciado…

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.