Cal. Codes » Civil Code / DIVISION 4. GENERAL PROVISIONS / PART 1. RELIEF / TITLE 4. UNIFORM SINGLE PUBLICATION ACT
California Codes

Cal. Civil Code § 3425.1 (2026)

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

This title may be cited as the Uniform Single Publication Act.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 10 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1959–2024 · leading case: Hebrew Academy of San Francisco v. Goldman, 173 P.3d 1004 (Cal. 2007).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Hebrew Academy of San Francisco v. Goldman, 173 P.3d 1004 (Cal. 2007). · cites it 2× “founded upon any single publication or exhibition or utterance, such as any one issue of a newspaper or book or magazine..”
NBCUniversal Media v. Superior Court CA2/4, 225 Cal. App. 4th 1222 (Cal. Ct. App. 2014). “RPIs attempted to distinguish the cases cited in this court’s alternative writ and contended that the holdings in Shively and Hebrew Academy addressing the discovery rule were limited to claims governed by the Uniform Single Publication Act (USPA; Civ. Code, § 3425.1); as RPIs’…”
Long v. Walt Disney Co., 2004 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 2087 (Cal. Ct. App. 2004). “On appeal, they contend that the trial court erred in ruling that their claims were subject to the Uniform Single Publication Act (USPA) (Civ. Code, § 3425.1 et seq.) and were therefore barred by the statutes of limitations (Code Civ.”
Keeton v. Hustler Magazine, Inc., 549 A.2d 1187 (N.H. 1988). “§ 12-651 (1982); Cal. Civ. Code §§ 3425.1 to 3425.5 (Deering 1984); .”
Miller v. Collectors Universe, Inc., 72 Cal. Rptr. 3d 194 (Cal. Ct. App. 2008). “625 ] [court relied on Legislature’s choice of the word “issue” rather than the word “edition,” when adopting and modifying the Uniform Single Publication Act (Civ. Code, § 3425.1 et seq.), as evidencing legislative intent to create a distinction between the two words].”
Block v. Major League Baseball, 98 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 5481 (Cal. Ct. App. 1998). “, that the class action was uncertifiable, as a matter of law, because of (1) complications caused by California’s Uniform Single Publication Act (Civ. Code, § 3425.1 et seq.), and (2) choice of law principles that would have required the court to apply the law of the state in…”
Bradford v. Am. Media Operations, Inc., 882 F. Supp. 1508 (E.D. Pa. 1995). “…Bradford, appended to Response, ¶ 6. 12 . The others are Arizona (Ariz.Rev.Stat.Ann. § 12-651 (1982)), California (Cal.Civ.Code §§ 3425.1 to 3425.5 (Peering 1984)), Idaho ( Idaho Code §§ 7-702 to 7-705 (1979)), Illinois (Ill. Ann.Stat. ch. 126, paras. 11 to 15 (Smith-Hurd…”
Ogden v. Ass'n of the United States Army, 177 F. Supp. 498 (D.D.C. 1959). “Cal.Civ.Code, §§ 3425.1 to 3425.5. 7 . 1953 Statutes, §§ 40-27-30 to 40-27-35.”
Lumentum Operations LLC v. nLIGHT Inc (W.D. Wash. 2024). “Indeed, the operative 3 complaint in that case, entitled “Fourth Amended Complaint for Misappropriation of 4 Trade Secrets and Breach of Non-Disclosure Agreement,” expressly asserted that “[t]he 5 acts of Defendants as alleged constitute misappropriation of trade secrets, as…”
Shively v. Bozanich, 102 Cal. Rptr. 2d 138 (Cal. Ct. App. 2001). “Furthermore, the Uniform Single Publication Act (Civ.Code, §§ 3425.1 et. seq.), the only statute specifically applicable to a mass media publication, merely limits a plaintiff to a single cause of action for a mass media publication, no matter how many copies are published in a…”
— Cal. Civil Code § 3425.1(b) — 1 case
Lumentum Operations LLC v. nLIGHT Inc (W.D. Wash. 2024). “Indeed, the operative 3 complaint in that case, entitled “Fourth Amended Complaint for Misappropriation of 4 Trade Secrets and Breach of Non-Disclosure Agreement,” expressly asserted that “[t]he 5 acts of Defendants as alleged constitute misappropriation of trade secrets, as…”
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.