§Why CasetextPricing

Motion For Summary Judgment

Motion

28 Cited authorities

  1. Aguilar v. Atlantic Richfield Co.

    25 Cal.4th 826 (Cal. 2001)   Cited 4,839 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Concluding that the gathering and dissemination of pricing information by the petroleum companies through an independent industry service did not imply collusive action where there was no evidence the information was misused as a basis for an unlawful conspiracy; rather, evidence suggested that individual companies used all available resources “to determine capacity, supply, and pricing decisions which would maximize their own individual profits”

  2. Saelzler v. Advanced Group 400

    25 Cal.4th 763 (Cal. 2001)   Cited 1,193 times
    Affirming summary judgment when plaintiffs evidence only raised a speculative possibility that defendant's breaches caused the plaintiff's injuries

  3. Robinson Helicopter Co. v. Dana Corp.

    34 Cal.4th 979 (Cal. 2004)   Cited 743 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Holding the "narrow" exception to the economic loss rule is "limited to a defendant's affirmative misrepresentations on which a plaintiff relies and which expose a plaintiff to liability for personal damages."

  4. Pacific Gas Electric Co. v. Bear Stearns Co.

    50 Cal.3d 1118 (Cal. 1990)   Cited 664 times   5 Legal Analyses
    Holding that interference with plaintiff's performance may give rise to a claim for interference with contractual relations if plaintiff's performance is made more costly or more burdensome

  5. Blickman Turkus, LP v. MF Downtown Sunnyvale, LLC

    162 Cal.App.4th 858 (Cal. Ct. App. 2008)   Cited 266 times
    Finding that duplication is not grounds for demurrer and that a motion to strike is the proper way to address duplicative material

  6. Graham v. Bank of America, N.A.

    226 Cal.App.4th 594 (Cal. Ct. App. 2014)   Cited 209 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Finding no causation for damages where the "prospect of losing the home to foreclosure [was] the result of default, not the alleged conduct of defendants"

  7. Union Bank v. Superior Court

    31 Cal.App.4th 573 (Cal. Ct. App. 1995)   Cited 353 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Finding no right to a cause of action because plaintiff admitted the defendant did not engage in misconduct

  8. Leslie G. v. Perry Associates

    43 Cal.App.4th 472 (Cal. Ct. App. 1996)   Cited 211 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding "there simply is no evidence from which to infer" an essential element of the plaintiff's cause of action and affirming summary judgment for the defendants

  9. Ingels v. Westwood One BroadCasting Services, Inc.

    129 Cal.App.4th 1050 (Cal. Ct. App. 2005)   Cited 153 times
    Holding that " defendant cannot be liable under § 17200 for committing 'unlawful business practices' without having violated another law"

  10. Scheiding v. Dinwiddie Constr. Co.

    69 Cal.App.4th 64 (Cal. Ct. App. 1999)   Cited 125 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Reversing grant of summary judgment and holding mere argument of absence of evidence to support nonmoving party's claim insufficient to shift burden to plaintiff

  11. Section 17200 - Unfair competition defined

    Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code § 17200   Cited 17,790 times   315 Legal Analyses
    Prohibiting unlawful business practices

  12. Section 437c - Motion for summary judgment

    Cal. Code Civ. Proc. § 437c   Cited 8,232 times   7 Legal Analyses
    Ruling on summary judgment motion must be based on "papers submitted" with the motion

  13. Section 3294 - When damages recoverable for sake of example and by way of punishment; employer liability for acts of employee; death from homicide

    Cal. Civ. Code § 3294   Cited 2,785 times   8 Legal Analyses
    Stating plaintiff may recover punitive damages "in addition to the actual damages"

  14. Section 1371 - Reimbursement of claims within 30 or 45 working days

    Cal. Health & Saf. Code § 1371   Cited 27 times

    (a) (1) A health care service plan, including a specialized health care service plan, shall reimburse claims or a portion of a claim, whether in state or out of state, as soon as practicable, but no later than 30 working days after receipt of the claim by the health care service plan, or if the health care service plan is a health maintenance organization, 45 working days after receipt of the claim by the health care service plan, unless the claim or portion thereof is contested by the plan, in which

  15. Section 1371.35 - Reimbursement within 30 or 45 working days; contest or denial of claim

    Cal. Health & Saf. Code § 1371.35   Cited 16 times

    (a) A health care service plan, including a specialized health care service plan, shall reimburse each complete claim, or portion thereof, whether in state or out of state, as soon as practical, but no later than 30 working days after receipt of the complete claim by the health care service plan, or if the health care service plan is a health maintenance organization, 45 working days after receipt of the complete claim by the health care service plan. However, a plan may contest or deny a claim,

  16. Section 1371.1 - Overpayment

    Cal. Health & Saf. Code § 1371.1   Cited 4 times

    (a) (1) Whenever a health care service plan, including a specialized health care service plan, determines that in reimbursing a claim for provider services an institutional or professional provider has been overpaid, and then notifies the provider in writing through a separate notice identifying the overpayment and the amount of the overpayment, the provider shall reimburse the health care service plan within 30 working days of receipt by the provider of the notice of overpayment unless the overpayment

  17. Section 1300.71 - Claims Settlement Practices

    Cal. Code Regs. tit. 28 § 1300.71   Cited 37 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Addressing how to calculate the reasonable and customary value of the health care services provided

  18. Section 1300.71.38 - Fast, Fair and Cost-Effective Dispute Resolution Mechanism

    Cal. Code Regs. tit. 28 § 1300.71.38   Cited 3 times

    All health care service plans and their capitated providers that pay claims (plan's capitated provider) shall establish a fast, fair and cost-effective dispute resolution mechanism to process and resolve contracted and non-contracted provider disputes. The plan and the plan's capitated provider may maintain separate dispute resolution mechanisms for contracted and non-contracted provider disputes and separate dispute resolution mechanisms for claims and other types of billing and contract disputes

  19. Section 1300.67.2 - Accessibility of Services

    Cal. Code Regs. tit. 28 § 1300.67.2   Cited 2 times

    Within each network service area of a plan, basic health care services and specialized health care services shall be readily available and accessible to each of the plan's enrollees; (a) The location of network providers, as defined in Rule 1300.67.2.2(b)(10), providing the covered health care services of the plan shall be within reasonable proximity of the business or personal residences of enrollees, and so located as to not result in unreasonable barriers to accessibility. (1) For the purposes

  20. Section 2240.1 - Adequacy and Accessibility of Provider Services

    Cal. Code Regs. tit. 10 § 2240.1

    (a) The provisions of this article apply to "health insurance" policies as defined by Insurance Code section 106(b). The requirements of this article apply to all health care services covered by the insurance policy. Notwithstanding the above, specialized health insurance policies as defined in Insurance Code section 106(c), other than specialized mental health insurance policies, are exempt from the provisions of this article, except as specified below, in subdivisions (a)(1), (a)(2), and (a)(3)