BREAKING NEWS: Supreme Court grants review in five Prop. 64 cases
The Supreme Court just granted review in five of the cases in which the Prop. 64 retroactivity question has been raised. All involve published Court of Appeal opinions:

• Californians for Disability Rights v. Mervyn's, Cal. Supreme Court case no. S131798
  
  
• Benson v. Kwikset Corp., Cal. Supreme Court case no. S132443
  
  
• Branick v. Downey Savings & Loan Assn., Cal. Supreme Court case no. S132433
  
  
• Bivens v. Corel Corp., Cal. Supreme Court case no. S132695
  
  
• Lytwyn v. Fry's Electronics, Inc., Cal. Supreme Court case no. S133075 (review granted on court's own motion)

I will post more on this development later.

UPDATE: Here's the story. The Court granted review outright in Mervyn's, and issued "grant and hold" orders in Bivens and Lytwyn. In Benson, the Court granted review of Mr. Benson's review petition, which raised the Prop. 64 issue, and denied review of Kwikset's review petition, which raised other UCL-related issues. Benson, too, is a "grant and hold" order, pending the outcome of Mervyn's. In Branick, the Court granted review of a limited issue:

If the standing limitations of Proposition 64 apply to actions under the Unfair Competition Law that were pending on November 3, 2004, may a plaintiff amend his or her complaint to substitute in or add a party that satisfies standing requirements of Business and Professions Code section 17204, as amended, and does such an amended complaint relate back to the initial complaint for statute of limitations purposes?

You may recall that in Branick, the Court of Appeal held that the trial court did have discretion to grant leave to amend. As I'm sure all my readers know, Mervyn's was the first decision on Prop. 64 retroactivity, and Branick was the second (and the first to address the amendment issue), so it makes sense that the Court would grant review in the way it did.
- posted by Kim Kralowec @ 1:26 PM