Supreme Court modifies Vasquez opinion

Yesterday, on its own motion, the Supreme Court issued an order modifying one sentence of its opinion in Vasquez v. State of California, 45 Cal.4th 243 (2008).  Previously, the sentence read:

For example, a plaintiff suing under the Consumers Legal Remedies Act (Civ. Code, § 1750 et seq.) must notify the defendant of the particular violations alleged and demand correction, repair, replacement, or other remedy at least 30 days before commencing an action.

Id. at 252 (slip op. at 8).  The sentence has been modified to read:

For example, a plaintiff suing under the Consumers Legal Remedies Act (Civ. Code, § 1750 et seq.) must notify the defendant of the particular violations alleged and demand correction, repair, replacement, or other remedy at least 30 days before commencing an action for damages.

(Emphasis added.)  This is an important correction, as a CLRA action for injunctive relief has no prelitigation demand requirement.  See Civ. Code § 1782(a) ("Thirty days or more prior to the commencement of an action for damages pursuant to this title, the consumer shall do the following: ...."); id. § 1782(d) ("An action for injunctive relief brought under the specific provisions of Section 1770 may be commenced without compliance with subdivision (a).") In fact, the CLRA specifically authorizes consumers to file suit for injunctive relief, then, after providing the appropriate notice, amend the complaint to add damages allegations "without leave of court."  Id. 

UPDATE: According to the Vasquez docket, a non-party, The Sturdevant Law Firm, filed a request for modification of the opinion, resulting in the modification discussed above.  In effect, the Supreme Court granted that request, although the order states that the Court modified the opinion on its own motion.  Excellent catch, Jim and Monique!