I have not received any reports on Tuesday's oral argument in Aryeh v. Canon Business Solutions, Inc., no. S184929, but Emily Green of the Daily Journal had an article yesterday.
In oral arguments Tuesday, state Supreme Court justices appeared sympathetic to a plaintiff who was barred from suing Canon Business Solutions Inc. because he failed to bring his lawsuit within a four-year statute of limitations time period.
The big picture question before the court was whether the multiple alleged overcharges by Canon were one distinct act, or if each overcharge was a separate act that triggered the statute of limitations clock anew. Aryeh's lawyers, adopting a position articulated by the dissenting justice in the appellate court, argued each overcharge should be considered a separate act.
The justices spent little time on a second question that had garnered the interest of many consumer attorneys: whether courts should take into account "delayed discovery," or the time the plaintiff finds out about the alleged unfair activity, in Unfair Competition Law cases.
The opinion is due in 90 days.