California Supreme Court Enforces Proposition 64's Limitations on Who Can Sue Under California's Unfair Competition Statute

California's Unfair Competition Law (UCL), which has historically been a boon for plaintiffs lawyers bringing overtime and discrimination claims, was narrowed significantly on July 24, 2006. Of great import to all of those who were being sued when Prop 641 was enacted, the California Supreme Court issued two decisions regarding its effect on lawsuits pending when the voters cast their ballots on November 3, 2004. In Californians for Disability Rights v. Mervyn's LLC, (CDR), the Court held that Prop 64's limitation that UCL claims be brought only by people who have suffered actual injury (in the form of lost money or property) as a result of unfair competition - applied to cases pending at the time Prop 64 took effect even if the case was on appeal. However, in a companion case to CDR, Branick v. Downey Savings and Loan Assoc., (Branick), the Court held that Prop 64 did not automatically bar Plaintiffs lawyers from saving their cases by amending the complaints to add new plaintiffs. The two decisions help clarify Prop 64's standing requirement and reinforced that Prop 64 raised the bar for plaintiffs seeking to file UCL claims.