California Codes

Cal. Civil Code § 1780 (2026)

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

(a)Any consumer who suffers any damage as a result of the use or employment by any person of a method, act, or practice declared to be unlawful by Section 1770 may bring an action against that person to recover or obtain any of the following:

(1)Actual damages, but in no case shall the total award of damages in a class action be less than one thousand dollars ($1,000).

(2)An order enjoining the methods, acts, or practices.

(3)Restitution of property.

(4)Punitive damages.

(5)Any other relief that the court deems proper.

(b)(1)Any consumer who is a senior citizen or a disabled person, as defined in subdivisions (f) and (g) of Section 1761, as part of an action under subdivision (a), may seek and be awarded, in addition to the remedies specified therein, up to five thousand dollars ($5,000) where the trier of fact does all of the following:

(A)Finds that the consumer has suffered substantial physical, emotional, or economic damage resulting from the defendant’s conduct.

(B)Makes an affirmative finding in regard to one or more of the factors set forth in subdivision (b) of Section 3345.

(C)Finds that an additional award is appropriate.

(2)Judgment in a class action by senior citizens or disabled persons under Section 1781 may award each class member that additional award if the trier of fact has made the foregoing findings.

(c)Whenever it is proven by a preponderance of the evidence that a defendant has engaged in conduct in violation of paragraph (24) of subdivision (a) of Section 1770, in addition to all other remedies otherwise provided in this section, the court shall award treble actual damages to the plaintiff. This subdivision shall not apply to attorneys licensed to practice law in California, who are subject to the California Rules of Professional Conduct and to the mandatory fee arbitration provisions of Article 13 (commencing with Section 6200) of Chapter 4 of Division 3 of the Business and Professions Code, when the fees charged or received are for providing representation in administrative agency appeal proceedings or court proceedings for purposes of procuring, maintaining, or securing public social services on behalf of a person or group of persons.

(d)An action under subdivision (a) or (b) may be commenced in the county in which the person against whom it is brought resides, has his or her principal place of business, or is doing business, or in the county where the transaction or any substantial portion thereof occurred.

In any action subject to this section, concurrently with the filing of the complaint, the plaintiff shall file an affidavit stating facts showing that the action has been commenced in a county described in this section as a proper place for the trial of the action. If a plaintiff fails to file the affidavit required by this section, the court shall, upon its own motion or upon motion of any party, dismiss the action without prejudice.

(e)The court shall award court costs and attorney’s fees to a prevailing plaintiff in litigation filed pursuant to this section. Reasonable attorney’s fees may be awarded to a prevailing defendant upon a finding by the court that the plaintiff’s prosecution of the action was not in good faith.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 292 cases (75 in the last 5 years), 1955–2026 · leading case: In re Nexus 6P Prods. Liab. Litig., 293 F. Supp. 3d 888 (N.D. Cal. 2018).
In re Nexus 6P Prods. Liab. Litig., 293 F. Supp. 3d 888 (N.D. Cal. 2018). · cites it 4× “California Consumers Legal Remedies Act The California Plaintiffs bring a claim under California's Consumers Legal Remedies Act ("CLRA"), Cal. Civ. Code § 1780 , on behalf of the California subclass.”
Colgan v. Leatherman Tool Grp., Inc., 2006 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 316 (Cal. Ct. App. 2006). · cites it 4× “Attorney Fees and Costs After the entry of judgment, plaintiffs filed a motion to recover their attorney fees and costs as the prevailing parties under the CLRA (Civil Code § 1780, subd. (d)) and under the private attorney general provisions of Code of Civil Procedure section…”
Antonio Hinojos v. Kohl's Corp., 718 F.3d 1098 (9th Cir. 2013). · cites it 4× “In turn, Cal. Civil Code § 1780 (a) provides a cause of action to “[a]ny consumer who suffers any damage as a result of the use or employment by any person of a method, act, or practice declared to be unlawful by Section 1770.”
Hogya v. Superior Court, 75 Cal. App. 3d 122 (Cal. Ct. App. 1977). · cites it 6× “Civil Code section 1780, 1 subdivision (a),-provides: “(a) Any consumer who suffers any damage as a result of the use or employment by any person of a method, act, or practice declared to be unlawful by Section 1770 may bring an action against such person to recover or obtain…”
Lunada Biomedical v. Nunez, 230 Cal. App. 4th 459 (Cal. Ct. App. 2014). · cites it 5× “) Civil Code section 1780, subdivision (a) of the CLRA states that “[a]ny consumer who suffers any damage as a result of the use or employment by any person of a method, act, or practice declared to be unlawful by Section 1770 may bring an action against that person to recover…”
Mazza v. Am. Honda Motor Co., Inc., 666 F.3d 581 (9th Cir. 2012). · cites it 2× “Under the CLRA, a plaintiff can recover actual damages (at least $1000), an injunction, restitution, punitive damages and "any other relief that the court deems proper," Cal Civ Code § 1780(a)(1)-(5), while a plaintiff can only recover restitution and injunctive relief under the…”
Veera v. Banana Repub., LLC, 6 Cal. App. 5th 907 (Cal. Ct. App. 2016). · cites it 3× “(Civ. Code, § 1780, subd. (a).) The CLRA sets forth 27 proscribed acts or practices.”
In Re Vioxx Class Cases, 180 Cal. App. 4th 116 (Cal. Ct. App. 2009). · cites it 3× “13 (Civ. Code, § 1780, subd. (a).) The language of the CLRA allows recovery when a consumer “suffers any damage as a result of’ the unlawful practice.”
Ries v. Arizona Beverages USA LLC, 287 F.R.D. 523 (N.D. Cal. 2012). · cites it 3× “, and Consumers Legal Remedies Act (CLRA), California Civil Code § 1780. Plaintiffs oppose the motion, and move, over defendants’ opposition, for certification of a class consisting of: “All persons in California who purchased an Arizona brand beverage from March 17, 2006 until…”
Corbett v. Hayward Dodge, Inc., 2004 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 5493 (Cal. Ct. App. 2004). · cites it 5× “Interpreting “Not in Good Faith” The trial court may award reasonable attorney fees “to a prevailing defendant upon a finding by the court that the plaintiff’s prosecution of the action was not in good faith.”
Davidson v. Kimberly-Clark Corp., 889 F.3d 956 (9th Cir. 2017). “Code § 17203 (requiring that an individual plead that she lost "money or property" because of the alleged deceptive conduct); Cal. Civ. Code § 1780 (a) (stating that a plaintiff asserting a cause of action under the CLRA need only plead that she suffered "any damage"); Hinojos v.”
Sanchez v. Valencia Holding Co., 353 P.3d 741 (Cal. 2015). · cites it 2× “‖ Civil Code section 1780 permits the consumer damaged by certain enumerated practices to seek various remedies including damages and injunctive relief.”
— Cal. Civil Code § 1780(a) — 38 cases
Astiana v. Kashi Co., 291 F.R.D. 493 (S.D. Cal. 2013).
Doe 1 v. Aol LLC, 719 F. Supp. 2d 1102 (N.D. Cal. 2010).
Chamberlan v. Ford Motor Co., 369 F. Supp. 2d 1138 (N.D. Cal. 2005).
Delarosa v. Boiron, Inc., 275 F.R.D. 582 (C.D. Cal. 2011).
In re iPhone Application Litig., 844 F. Supp. 2d 1040 (N.D. Cal. 2012).
— Cal. Civil Code § 1780(a)(1) — 8 cases
Mazza v. Am. Honda Motor Co., Inc., 666 F.3d 581 (9th Cir. 2012). “Under the CLRA, a plaintiff can recover actual damages (at least $1000), an injunction, restitution, punitive damages and "any other relief that the court deems proper," Cal Civ Code § 1780(a)(1)-(5), while a plaintiff can only recover restitution and injunctive relief under the…”
In re Sony Gaming Networks & Customer Data Sec. Breach Litig., 996 F. Supp. 2d 942 (S.D. Cal. 2014).
Delarosa v. Boiron, Inc., 275 F.R.D. 582 (C.D. Cal. 2011).
Anunziato v. eMachines, Inc., 402 F. Supp. 2d 1133 (C.D. Cal. 2005).
Chamberlan v. Ford Motor Co., 369 F. Supp. 2d 1138 (N.D. Cal. 2005).
— Cal. Civil Code § 1780(a)(2) — 1 case
Stearns v. Ticketmaster Corp., 655 F.3d 1013 (9th Cir. 2011).
— Cal. Civil Code § 1780(a)(3) — 2 cases
Ries v. Arizona Beverages USA LLC, 287 F.R.D. 523 (N.D. Cal. 2012). “, and Consumers Legal Remedies Act (CLRA), California Civil Code § 1780. Plaintiffs oppose the motion, and move, over defendants’ opposition, for certification of a class consisting of: “All persons in California who purchased an Arizona brand beverage from March 17, 2006 until…”
Makaeff v. Trump Univ., LLC, 309 F.R.D. 631 (S.D. Cal. 2015).
— Cal. Civil Code § 1780(a)(4) — 4 cases
Tracker Marine, L.P. v. Ogle, 108 S.W.3d 349 (Tex. App. 2003).
Bristol Tech., Inc. v. Microsoft Corp., 114 F. Supp. 2d 59 (D. Conn. 2000).
— Cal. Civil Code § 1780(b) — 6 cases
Tracker Marine, L.P. v. Ogle, 108 S.W.3d 349 (Tex. App. 2003).
Hood v. Hartford Life & Accident Ins., 567 F. Supp. 2d 1221 (E.D. Cal. 2008).
Von Grabe v. Sprint PCS, 312 F. Supp. 2d 1285 (S.D. Cal. 2003).
Delarosa v. Boiron, Inc., 275 F.R.D. 582 (C.D. Cal. 2011).
Berkson v. Gogo LLC, 147 F. Supp. 3d 123 (E.D.N.Y 2015).
— Cal. Civil Code § 1780(b)(1) — 1 case
In Re Guidant Corp. Implantable Defibrillators Prods. Liab. Litig., 489 F. Supp. 2d 932 (D. Minnesota 2007).
— Cal. Civil Code § 1780(c) — 1 case
Hoey v. Sony Elec., Inc., 515 F. Supp. 2d 1099 (N.D. Cal. 2007).
— Cal. Civil Code § 1780(d) — 14 cases
Beasley v. Conagra Brands, Inc., 374 F. Supp. 3d 869 (N.D. Cal. 2019).
McVicar v. Goodman Global, Inc., 1 F. Supp. 3d 1044 (C.D. Cal. 2014).
In re Sony Gaming Networks & Customer Data Sec. Breach Litig., 903 F. Supp. 2d 942 (S.D. Cal. 2012).
In Re Apple & AT & T Ipad Unlimited Data Plan Litig., 802 F. Supp. 2d 1070 (N.D. Cal. 2011).
— Cal. Civil Code § 1780(e) — 11 cases
Travis Gonzales v. Carmax Auto Superstores, LLC, 840 F.3d 644 (9th Cir. 2016).
Parkinson v. Hyundai Motor Am., 796 F. Supp. 2d 1160 (C.D. Cal. 2010).
Newton v. Am. Debt Servs., Inc., 854 F. Supp. 2d 712 (N.D. Cal. 2012).
Whited v. Galindo (In Re Galindo), 467 B.R. 201 (Bankr. S.D. Cal. 2012).
Naotaka Kitagawa, Jr. v. Robert Gaudet, Jr., 571 F. App'x 560 (9th Cir. 2014).
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.