Barrett

Barrett v. State of Cal. CA4/1

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMay 16, 2024D081639California3,274 words

Opinion

Opinion

Do, J.

INTRODUCTION

In this taxpayer lawsuit, James G. Barrett asserted the Pfizer and Moderna COVID-19 mRNA vaccines “are not vaccines,” are unlawfully “misbranded,” and any public official or public entity who used public funds to promote or distribute them were wasting public funds or failing to perform their mandatory duties. The trial court sustained demurrers to his first amended complaint without leave to amend. He appeals from the judgments of dismissals, challenging only the denial of leave to file his proposed second amended complaint. We conclude Barrett has forfeited his appellate challenge by failing to present any cogent arguments as to how the proposed amendments cure the pleading defects. Even if not forfeited, we conclude the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying leave to amend. We affirm.

BACKGROUND1

I. Federal Emergency Use Authorizations and Approvals for the Pfizer and Moderna COVID-19 mRNA Vaccines As a result of the global outbreak of the SARS-CoV-2 virus that causes COVID-19 illness, the Secretary of the U.S. Health and Human Services Agency (HHS) declared a national public health emergency on February 4, 2020. One month later, on March 4,…

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.