42 Cited authorities

Eisenberg v. Insurance Co. of North America
815 F.2d 1285 (9th Cir. 1987) Cited 730 times
Holding that summary judgment may be granted if "the evidence is merely colorable . . . or is not significantly probative"
Love v. Fire Ins. Exchange
221 Cal.App.3d 1136 (Cal. Ct. App. 1990) Cited 562 times 2 Legal Analyses
Holding bad faith occurs when the insurer withholds benefits unreasonably or without proper cause
Cantu v. Resolution Trust Corp.
4 Cal.App.4th 857 (Cal. Ct. App. 1992) Cited 516 times
Holding that "intentional infliction of emotional distress is an injury to the person"
Egan v. Mutual of Omaha Ins. Co.
24 Cal.3d 809 (Cal. 1979) Cited 670 times 3 Legal Analyses
Holding that punitive damages could be awarded against an insurance company based on the tortious acts of its claims representatives
Melchior v. New Line Productions, Inc.
106 Cal.App.4th 779 (Cal. Ct. App. 2003) Cited 316 times
Holding that there is no cause of action in California for unjust enrichment
Meyer v. Sprint Spectrum L.P.
45 Cal.4th 634 (Cal. 2009) Cited 263 times 4 Legal Analyses
Holding that a demand letter under section 1782 can set forth "an individual or class grievance" with respect to alleged violations of section 1770
April Enterprises, Inc. v. KTTV
147 Cal.App.3d 805 (Cal. Ct. App. 1983) Cited 358 times
Holding that a party can be liable in tort for actions authorized by the contract
Barton v. New United Motor Manufacturing, Inc.
43 Cal.App.4th 1200 (Cal. Ct. App. 1996) Cited 249 times
Holding that a one-year statute of limitations governs claims for wrongful termination in violation of public policy
Jogani v. Superior Court (Haresh Jogani)
165 Cal.App.4th 901 (Cal. Ct. App. 2008) Cited 156 times
Concluding that at the time of the adoption of the California Constitution in 1850 quantum meruit was an action at law
Gutierrez v. Mofid
39 Cal.3d 892 (Cal. 1985) Cited 263 times
Holding when the patient's "'reasonably founded suspicions [have been aroused],' and [he] has actually 'become alerted to the necessity for investigation and pursuit of [his] remedies' the one-year period for suit begins"
Section 430.10 - Grounds for objection by party against whom complaint or cross-complaint filed
Cal. Code Civ. Proc. § 430.10 Cited 1,043 times
Explaining "[t]he party against whom a complaint ... has been filed may object, by demurrer ..., to the pleading" on the basis that "[t]he pleading does not state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action"

Demurrer

42 Cited authorities

Holding that summary judgment may be granted if "the evidence is merely colorable . . . or is not significantly probative"

Holding bad faith occurs when the insurer withholds benefits unreasonably or without proper cause

Holding that "intentional infliction of emotional distress is an injury to the person"

Holding that punitive damages could be awarded against an insurance company based on the tortious acts of its claims representatives

Holding that there is no cause of action in California for unjust enrichment

Holding that a demand letter under section 1782 can set forth "an individual or class grievance" with respect to alleged violations of section 1770

Holding that a party can be liable in tort for actions authorized by the contract

Holding that a one-year statute of limitations governs claims for wrongful termination in violation of public policy

Concluding that at the time of the adoption of the California Constitution in 1850 quantum meruit was an action at law

Holding when the patient's "'reasonably founded suspicions [have been aroused],' and [he] has actually 'become alerted to the necessity for investigation and pursuit of [his] remedies' the one-year period for suit begins"

Explaining "[t]he party against whom a complaint ... has been filed may object, by demurrer ..., to the pleading" on the basis that "[t]he pleading does not state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action"