Legal Opinion

Kight v. Cashcall, Inc.

California Court of Appeal

Decided November 21, 2011No. D057440PublishedCited by 31 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

HALLER, J.

Plaintiffs brought individual and class claims against CashCall, Inc., a consumer finance company, alleging CashCall secretly monitored their telephone conversations with CashCall employees without plaintiffs’ knowledge or consent. Plaintiffs alleged this practice violated their common law, statutory, and constitutional privacy rights. The court certified a class on one of these claims, an alleged violation of Penal Code1 section 632, which imposes liability on a person (defined to include a “corporation”) who intentionally “eavesdrops upon or records [a] confidential…

2Cases cited34 opinions

  1. Aguilar v. Atlantic Richfield Co.California Supreme Court · 2001
  2. People v. MauryCalifornia Supreme Court · 2003
  3. Murphy v. Kenneth Cole Productions, Inc.California Supreme Court · 2007
  4. Miller v. Department of CorrectionsCalifornia Supreme Court · 2005
  5. People v. CoronadoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1995

29 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by31 opinions

  1. Hataishi v. First American Home Buyers Protection Corp.California Court of Appeal · 2014
  2. Yeager v. Corrections Corp. of AmericaDistrict Court, E.D. California · 2013
  3. Powell v. Union Pacific RailroadDistrict Court, E.D. California · 2012
  4. Ades v. Omni Hotels Management Corp.District Court, C.D. California · 2014
  5. Santa Ana Police Officers Ass'n v. City of Santa Ana, California Court of Appeal, 5th District2017

26 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API