Petition for review after the Court of Appeal affirmed the judgment in a civil action. This case presents the following issues: (1) May the continuing violation doctrine, under which a defendant may be held liable for actions that take place outside the limitations period if those actions are sufficiently linked to unlawful conduct within the limitations period, be asserted in an action under the Unfair Competition Law (Bus. & Prof. Code, ? 17200 et seq.)? (2) May the continuous accrual doctrine, under which each violation of a periodic obligation or duty is deemed to give rise to a separate cause of action that accrues at the time of the individual wrong, be asserted in such an action? (3) May the delayed discovery rule, under which a cause of action does not accrue until a reasonable person in the plaintiff's position has actual or constructive knowledge of facts giving rise to a claim, be asserted in such an action?
Friday, October 22, 2010
California Supreme Court Grants Review in Aryeh v. Canon Business Solutions
On October 20, 2010, the California Supreme Court granted plaintiff/appellant’s petition for review in Aryeh v. Canon Business Solutions, Inc., 185 Cal. App. 4th 1159 (2010). As previously discussed here, the Second District concluded that the continuing violations doctrine does not apply to claims brought under the UCL, barring claims predicated on reoccurring conduct commencing more than four years prior to filing. The statement of issues contained on the California Supreme Court's website is as follows: