Cal. Codes » Civil Code / DIVISION 4. GENERAL PROVISIONS / PART 1. RELIEF / TITLE 2. COMPENSATORY RELIEF / CHAPTER 2. Measure of Damages [[3300.] - 3361.] / ARTICLE 4. General Provisions
California Codes

Cal. Civil Code § 3360 (2026)

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

When a breach of duty has caused no appreciable detriment to the party affected, he may yet recover nominal damages.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 40 cases (12 in the last 5 years), 1949–2026 · leading case: Troyk v. Farmers Grp., Inc., 171 Cal. App. 4th 1305 (Cal. Ct. App. 2009).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Troyk v. Farmers Grp., Inc., 171 Cal. App. 4th 1305 (Cal. Ct. App. 2009). “(Civ. Code, § 3360 [“When a breach of duty has caused no appreciable detriment to the party affected, he may yet recover nominal damages.”
Mission Beverage Co. v. Pabst Brewing Co., 223 Cal. Rptr. 3d 547 (Cal. Ct. App. 5th 2017). “3d 257 ); (3) nominal damages ( Civ. Code, § 3360 ; Sweet v. Johnson (1959) 169 Cal.”
In re Facebook Privacy Litig., 192 F. Supp. 3d 1053 (N.D. Cal. 2016). · cites it 3× “2d 499 (1959); see also Cal. Civ. Code § 3360 (“When a breach of duty has caused no appreciable detriment to the party affected, he may yet recover nominal damages.”
Kristin Perry v. Dennis Hollingsworth, 18 F.4th 622 (9th Cir. 2021). “See Cal. Civ. Code § 3360 (“When a breach of duty has caused no appreciable detriment to the party affected, he may yet recover nominal damages.”
Tribeca Companies, LLC v. First Am. Title Ins., 239 Cal. App. 4th 1088 (Cal. Ct. App. 2015). “(Civ. Code, § 3360; see Sweet v. Johnson (1959) 169 Cal.”
Haley v. Casa Del Rey Homeowners Ass'n, 63 Cal. Rptr. 3d 514 (Cal. Ct. App. 2007). “” Nominal damages may be awarded in a breach of contract action (Civ. Code, § 3360; Judicial Council of Cal.”
Midland Pac. Bldg. Corp. v. King, 64 A.L.R. 6th 775 (Cal. Ct. App. 2007). “The Kings argue there is no evidence of damages. But the Kings cite no authority for the proposition that damages is an element of a cause of action for breach of contract.”
Opperman v. Path, Inc., 84 F. Supp. 3d 962 (N.D. Cal. 2015). “Code § 3336, and because nominal damages are always available under California law, Cal. Civ.Code § 3360. These arguments are not persuasive.”
Scofield v. Critical Air Med., Inc., 96 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 3708 (Cal. Ct. App. 1996). “Unlike the Second Restatement, the law of this state clearly allows a cause of action for false imprisonment notwithstanding the fact a plaintiff suffered merely nominal damage.”
Washington v. Farlice, 1 Cal. App. 4th 766 (Cal. Ct. App. 1991). “(Civ. Code, § 3360.) The case at bar, however, is legally and factually distinguishable.”
Crane-McNab v. Cnty. of Merced, 773 F. Supp. 2d 861 (E.D. Cal. 2011). “1972); see Cal. Civ.Code § 3360 (“When a breach of duty has caused no appreciable detriment to the party affected, he may yet recover nominal damages.”
Hutcherson v. Alexander, 38 A.L.R. 3d 636 (Cal. Ct. App. 1968). “Thus, in no event should the court have deferred the issue of past damages to a later date in order to give plaintiffs a second chance to prove their damages according to profits made in entirely new and different circumstances. In fact, the trial judge could not possibly…”
Show all 40 citing cases →
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.