Cal. Codes » Civil Code
California Codes

Cal. Civil Code § 1575 (2026)

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section CA-LEGleginfo.legislature.ca.gov JustiaCode on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

Undue influence consists:

1.In the use, by one in whom a confidence is reposed by another, or who holds a real or apparent authority over him, of such confidence or authority for the purpose of obtaining an unfair advantage over him;

2.In taking an unfair advantage of another’s weakness of mind; or,

3.In taking a grossly oppressive and unfair advantage of another’s necessities or distress.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 52 cases (9 in the last 5 years), 1880–2025 · leading case: Van Zandt v. Mbunda (In Re Mbunda), 484 B.R. 344 (9th Cir. BAP 2012).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Van Zandt v. Mbunda (In Re Mbunda), 484 B.R. 344 (9th Cir. BAP 2012). · cites it 3× “30, a claim for elder abuse must include: (1) a wrongful use; (2) an undue influence/unfair advantage; or (3) an intent to defraud.”
In Re Marriage of Starr, 189 Cal. App. 4th 277 (Cal. Ct. App. 2010). · cites it 3× “) Undue influence is statutorily defined as taking unfair advantage of another’s weakness of mind (Civ. Code, § 1575, subd. 2), or taking a grossly oppressive or unfair advantage of another’s necessity or distress (Civ.”
Odorizzi v. Bloomfield Sch. Dist., 246 Cal. App. 2d 123 (Cal. Ct. App. 1966). · cites it 4× “” (Civ. Code, § 1575.) While most reported eases of undue influence involve persons who bear a confidential relationship to one another, a confidential or authoritative relationship between the parties need not be present when the undue influence involves unfair advantage taken…”
Naoko Ohno v. Yuko Yasuma, 723 F.3d 984 (9th Cir. 2013). “The Japanese trial court’s judgment does not clearly establish either knowledge or intent on the part of Yasuma or Saints of Glory to “incite anxiety” or “cause terror.” Facts in the record such as Yasuma’s discouragement of the use of medication, Ohno’s regular attendance at…”
Chan v. Lund, 188 Cal. App. 4th 1159 (Cal. Ct. App. 2010). · cites it 2× “” (Civ. Code, § 1575, subd. 3.) 23 Chan argues, citing Keithley v.”
Dario Martinez-Gonzalez v. Elkhorn Packing Co. LLC, 25 F.4th 613 (9th Cir. 2021). · cites it 3× “Cal. Civ. Code § 1575 . Undue influence, however, “cannot be used as a pretext to avoid bad bargains or escape from bargains which refuse to come up to expectations.”
Das v. Bank of Am., N.A., 186 Cal. App. 4th 727 (Cal. Ct. App. 2010). “” Civil Code section 1575 further provides that “[u]ndue influence consists: [f] .”
Fossum v. Fossum, 192 Cal. App. 4th 336 (Cal. Ct. App. 2011). “” (Civ. Code, § 1575.) Contrary to Edward’s assertions, Sandra was not required to show fraud, or deceit or that he overtly or implicitly threatened her to get her to sign the deed.”
David v. Hermann, 2005 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 4215 (Cal. Ct. App. 2005). “699 ]; Civ. Code, § 1575.) “The proof of undue influence by circumstantial evidence usually requires a showing of a number of factors which, in combination, justify the inference, but which taken individually and alone are not sufficient.”
Lintz v. Lintz, 222 Cal. App. 4th 1346 (Cal. Ct. App. 2014). “30 in effect at trial provided that financial abuse of an elder occurred when property was taken for a wrongful use, or with intent to defraud, or by undue influence as defined in Civil Code section 1575. Civil Code section 1575 defines undue influence as: “(1) In the use, by…”
Bounds v. Superior Court, 229 Cal. App. 4th 468 (Cal. Ct. App. 2014). “” (Civ. Code, § 1575.) 2 In the present case, the core dispute is whether Bounds’s alleged execution of the escrow instructions is sufficient to plead a taking of the real property 3 within the meaning of section 15610.”
Mangindin v. Washington Mut. Bank, 637 F. Supp. 2d 700 (N.D. Cal. 2009). “) Under Cal. Civ.Code § 1575, undue influence consists of (1) a person who is in a position of confidence (2) taking “unfair advantage of another’s weakness of mind .”
Show all 52 citing cases →
— Cal. Civil Code § 1575(1) — 1 case
Naoko Ohno v. Yuko Yasuma, 723 F.3d 984 (9th Cir. 2013). “The Japanese trial court’s judgment does not clearly establish either knowledge or intent on the part of Yasuma or Saints of Glory to “incite anxiety” or “cause terror.” Facts in the record such as Yasuma’s discouragement of the use of medication, Ohno’s regular attendance at…”
— Cal. Civil Code § 1575(2) — 1 case
Kelly v. Provident Life & Accident Ins., 734 F. Supp. 2d 1085 (S.D. Cal. 2010).
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.