Today's papers are full of the news:
- The Recorder (subscription): "Ruling Renders Prop 64 Retroactive" (with quotations from yours truly)
- The Daily Journal (subscription): "Court Gives, Takes With Proposition 64"
- Associated Press (San Francisco Chronicle): "California Supreme Court clarifies Proposition 64 reach"
The Recorder reports that attorneys for the plaintiffs in Mervyn's and Branick intend to seek leave to amend to substitute plaintiffs who can satisfy Prop. 64's standing provisions:
In the suit against Mervyn's, plaintiffs' lawyer [James] Sturdevant said that since about 16 disabled individuals testified against the retailer at trial, he believes his clients wouldn't have any problem amending their complaint to comply with the high court's ruling.
Michael Spencer, a partner in Milberg Weiss Bershad & Schulman's New York office who represented the plaintiffs against Downey Savings, said he felt the same way.
"While our clients are disappointed that the Supreme Court interpreted Prop 64 to apply to pending cases," he wrote in an e-mail, "the court's reasoning should allow these cases to continue unimpaired once the complaints are amended to bring in plaintiffs who have suffered injury."