Speyer v. Avis Rent a Car System, Inc.
Docket: No. 05-56764
Court: Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit; September 14, 2007; Federal Appellate Court
1. The district court's dismissal of the plaintiffs’ claim under California Civil Code Section 1936 was correct, as the statute does not imply extraterritorial application without clear language indicating such intent. The statute’s references to specific California locations and the requirement for audits to be provided to the California legislature support this conclusion. 2. The dismissal of the plaintiffs’ unfair competition claim was also upheld. The court found that the defendants' actions were not "unlawful, unfair, or fraudulent" under California's Business and Professions Code Section 17200. The defendants' conduct did not violate California law, nor was there any allegation of violations in other states. Additionally, the plaintiffs did not contest that the total price was clearly disclosed to consumers. 3. Defendants are entitled to reasonable attorney's fees and costs for the appeal under California law, with the assessment of the amount referred to the court’s Appellate Commissioner, who has the authority to award fees, subject to reconsideration by the panel. 4. The plaintiffs’ request for judicial notice was denied due to the inclusion of material outside the record and its irrelevance to the appeal. The decision is affirmed and stated as not suitable for publication or establishing precedent, except as noted under 9th Circuit Rule 36-3.