Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
15 California opinions name it 1 courts 2012–2024 5 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by California courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Aleksick v. 7-Eleven, Inc.green2 sentences2024(See Aleksick v. 7-Eleven, Inc. (2012) 205 Cal.App.4th 1176, 1185 [“When a statutory claim fails, a derivative UCL claim also fails”].) Thus, to the extent the first two causes of action were insufficiently pled, the UCL cause of action was also insufficiently pled. 2023(See Aleksick v. 7-Eleven, Inc. (2012) 205 Cal.App.4th 1176, 1185 [“When a statutory claim fails, a derivative UCL claim also fails”]; see also Krantz v. BT Visual Images (2001) 89 Cal.App.4th 164, 178 [UCL claims that are derivative of other substantive causes of action “stand or fall 6 depending on the fate of the antecedent substantive causes of action”].) Instead, Gomez contends the trial court erred by sustaining the demurrer without leave to amend because she pled sufficient facts to state a claim for damages under HBOR, and because she has adequately alleged she was prejudiced by the al | 8 | 9 |
Cansino v. Bank of Americagreen2 sentences2015(See Aleksick v. 7-Eleven, Inc. (2012) 205 Cal.App.4th 1176, 1185 [“When a statutory claim fails, a derivative UCL claim also fails.”]; Cansino, supra, 224 Cal.App.4th at p. 1474 [when fraud claims fail for lack of specificity, UCL claim based on fraud also fails].) Accordingly, the dismissal of the Satos’ UCL claim must stand. 2015(See Aleksick v. 7-Eleven, Inc. (2012) 205 Cal.App.4th 1176, 1185 [“When a statutory claim fails, a derivative UCL claim also fails.”]; Cansino, supra, 224 Cal.App.4th at p. 1474 [when fraud claims fail for lack of specificity, UCL claim based on fraud also fails].) Accordingly, the dismissal of the Satos’ UCL claim must stand. | 3 | 3 |
Pizarro v. Lamb's Players Theatregreen2 sentences2016(Javorsky v. Western Athletic Clubs, Inc. (2015) 242 Cal.App.4th 1386, 1408 , citing Pizarro v. Lamb's Players Theatre (2006) 135 Cal.App.4th 1171 , 1177.) 30 DISPOSITION The judgments are affirmed. 2015Because the claim under the Act was properly rejected on summary judgment, we must affirm the trial court’s ruling disposing of the derivative UCL claim as well. 24 (Pizarro, supra, 135 Cal.App.4th at p. 1177; Ingels v. Westwood One Broadcasting Services, Inc. (2005) 129 Cal.App.4th 1050, 1068 .) III. | 2 | 3 |
Amn Healthcare, Inc. v. Aya Healthcare Servs., Inc.green2 sentences2024(See, e.g., AMN Healthcare, Inc. v. Aya Healthcare Services, Inc. (2018) 28 Cal.App.5th 923, 950 [“when the underlying legal claim fails, so too will a derivative UCL claim”].) By her third claim, Baptiste sought to recover minimum wages on a theory of quasi-contract or unjust enrichment. 2021(Accord, Martinez, supra, 49 Cal.4th 48, fn. 10 [plaintiffs’ UCL claims depended on validity of three Labor Code violation claims; summary judgment affirmed as to all claims based on wage order’s employer test]; accord, Henderson v. Equilon Enterprises, LLC, supra, 40 Cal.App.5th at pp. 1114, 1130 [affirming summary judgment on UCL claim based on conclusion that Shell was not a joint employer under Martinez]; AMN Healthcare, Inc. v. Aya Healthcare Services, Inc. (2018) 28 Cal.App.5th 923, 950 [when underlying legal claim fails, so too will a derivative UCL claim].) 57 VII. | 2 | 2 |
Ingels v. Westwood One Broadcasting Services, Inc.green2 sentences2015(Pizarro, supra, 135 Cal.App.4th at p. 1177; Ingels v. Westwood One Broadcasting Services, Inc. (2005) 129 Cal.App.4th 1050, 1068 [ 28 Cal.Rptr.3d 933 ].) III. 2015Because the claim under the Act was properly rejected on summary judgment, we must affirm the trial court’s ruling disposing of the derivative UCL claim as well. 24 (Pizarro, supra, 135 Cal.App.4th at p. 1177; Ingels v. Westwood One Broadcasting Services, Inc. (2005) 129 Cal.App.4th 1050, 1068 .) III. | 1 | 2 |
Krantz v. Bt Visual Images, L.L.Cgreen1 sentence2023(See Aleksick v. 7-Eleven, Inc. (2012) 205 Cal.App.4th 1176, 1185 [“When a statutory claim fails, a derivative UCL claim also fails”]; see also Krantz v. BT Visual Images (2001) 89 Cal.App.4th 164, 178 [UCL claims that are derivative of other substantive causes of action “stand or fall 6 depending on the fate of the antecedent substantive causes of action”].) Instead, Gomez contends the trial court erred by sustaining the demurrer without leave to amend because she pled sufficient facts to state a claim for damages under HBOR, and because she has adequately alleged she was prejudiced by the al | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in California. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Javorsky v. Western Athletic Clubs, Inc.
green
1 sentence2016(Javorsky v. Western Athletic Clubs, Inc. (2015) 242 Cal.App.4th 1386, 1408 , citing Pizarro v. Lamb's Players Theatre (2006) 135 Cal.App.4th 1171 , 1177.) 30 DISPOSITION The judgments are affirmed. | 1 | 2016–2016 |
Price v. Starbucks Corp.
green
1 sentence2015(Price v. Starbucks Corp. (2011) 192 Cal.App.4th 1136, 1147 .) The UCL claim fails for the additional reason that Goldenpark cannot establish standing to bring a private UCL action. | 1 | 2015–2015 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.