Legal Opinion
Trinkle v. California State Lottery
California Court of Appeal
Decided April 6, 1999No. C029083PublishedCited by 25 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
CALLAHAN, J.
Plaintiff John Trinkle sought “restitution of and disgorgement of profits” earned by the California State Lottery (CSL) on the theory that CSL engaged in unfair business competition (Bus. & Prof. Code, § 17200 et seq.) by operating the “illegal” games of Keno and Scratcher. The trial court sustained CSL’s demurrer without leave to amend. Trinkle appeals.
We conclude that the CSL, a state agency, is not a “person” within the meaning of California’s unfair competition law and that statutory governmental immunity protects CSL from suit on the facts alleged. We will therefore…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- Shoemaker v. MyersCalifornia Supreme Court · 1990
- Hensler v. City of GlendaleCalifornia Supreme Court · 1994
- Hendy v. LosseCalifornia Supreme Court · 1991
- Podolsky v. First Healthcare Corp.California Court of Appeal · 1996
- Venuto v. Owens-Corning Fiberglas Corp.California Court of Appeal · 1971
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by25 opinions
- Wells v. One2One Learning FoundationCalifornia Supreme Court · 2006
- Tuchscher Development Enterprises, Inc. v. San Diego Unified Port DistrictCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2003
- Nuveen Municipal High Income Opportunity Fund v. City of AlamedaCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2013
- Vernon v. State of CaliforniaCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2004
- Ivanoff v. Bank of America, N.A.California Court of Appeal · 2017
20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.