Court Opinion

ID: 9796355
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-31 03:56:10.080553+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T08:50:10.160079
License: Public Domain

WERDEGAR, J., Concurring.
I agree with the majority that a plaintiff, in order to state a claim for interference with prospective economic advantage, need not plead that a defendant acted with the specific intent to interfere with the plaintiffs business expectancy, and with the reasoning leading to that conclusion. (Maj. opn., ante, at pp. 1141, 1153-1166.) Under compulsion of Kraus v. Trinity Management Services, Inc. (2000) 23 Cal.4th 116 [96 Cal.Rptr.2d 485, 999 P.2d 718], from which I dissented, I further agree that nonrestitutionary disgorgement of profits is not an available remedy in an individual action under the unfair competition law, Business and Professions Code section 17200 et seq. (Maj. opn., ante, at p. 1152.) Accordingly, I concur in the judgment.