Procedural Posture

Appellant individual sought review of judgment of the Superior Court of Sacramento County (California), which sustained demurrers to appellants complaint, without leave to amend, because none of the three causes of action about alleged unfair pricing practices in Hawaiian hotels stated a viable cause of action against respondent Hawaiian hotels and others.

Overview: unclean hands jury instruction

Appellant individual filed a class action complaint against respondent Hawaiian hotels and others alleging that the rate charged to appellant for rooms was higher than a so-called "Kamaaina", local resident rate, that respondents conspired among themselves in furtherance of the discriminatory acts described in the first cause of action, and that respondents violated certain laws, statutes, rules and regulations and the policies of the State of California and engaged in unfair and deceptive acts and practices contrary to the public policies of the State of California. The trial court sustained respondents' demurrer to all three causes of action. On appeal, the court affirmed because there was no common law rule governing innkeeper pricing, except that it be reasonable. Accordingly, the first cause of action did not allege a viable cause of action under any statute or the common law, there could be no conspiracy unless there was a cause of action, and allegations of violations of unspecified laws and policies were similarly defective.

Outcome

The court affirmed the trial court's judgment that sustained respondent Hawaiian hotels and others' demurrer to appellant individual's price fixing allegations because none of the three alleged causes of action articulated a viable complaint inasmuch as there was no common law, constitutional, or statutory violation, and therefore no cognizable conspiracy.

Posted by: saimkhan at 11:07 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 278 words, total size 2 kb.