Legal Opinion

Hataishi v. First American Home Buyers Protection Corp.

California Court of Appeal

Decided February 21, 2014No. B244769PublishedCited by 18 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

HITCHING, J.

INTRODUCTION

Named plaintiff Dina Hataishi (Plaintiff) appeals from a trial court order denying her motion for certification of a California class of defendant First American Home Buyers Protection Corporation’s (First American) customers whose telephone conversations were recorded without warning. Plaintiff contends that First American’s conduct violates Penal Code 1 section 632, which prohibits the intentional recording of a “confidential communication” without the consent of all parties to the communication. The trial court denied Plaintiff’s motion for class…

2Cases cited15 opinions

  1. Brinker Restaurant Corp. v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 2012
  2. Vasquez v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1971
  3. Linder v. Thrifty Oil Co.California Supreme Court · 2000
  4. Sav-On Drug Stores, Inc. v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 2004
  5. Kearney v. Salomon Smith Barney, Inc.California Supreme Court · 2006

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

3Cited by18 opinions

  1. Safari Club Int'l v. Lawrence RudolphCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2017
  2. Santa Ana Police Officers Ass'n v. City of Santa Ana, California Court of Appeal, 5th District2017
  3. Safari Club Int'l v. Lawrence RudolphCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2017
  4. CS Wang & Assoc. v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.District Court, E.D. Illinois · 2018
  5. Moen v. Regents of the Univ. of Cal., California Court of Appeal, 5th District2018

13 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