Interesting discussion of equitable vs. non-equitable monetary relief: Bayer v. Neiman Marcus Group

UCL - federal decisionsUCL - remedies in generalUCL - restitution

Jun 30

Written By

The Ninth Circuit's recent opinion in Bayer v. Neiman Marcus Corp., ___ F.3d ___ (9th Cir. Jun. 26, 2017), contains a thought-provoking discussion of equitable vs. non-equitable forms of monetary relief. See slip op. at 16-20.

The case does not involve the UCL, and it considers federal law rather than California law, but the discussion resonates for me as I think about UCL restitution and the differences between restitutionary and non-restitutionary disgorgement. Because of course I think about that all the time, especially on warm summer days like today.

Interesting discussion of equitable vs. non-equitable monetary relief: Bayer v. Neiman Marcus Group

Recent Ninth Circuit UCL decision considers all three prongs: Friedman v. AARP, Inc.

U.S. Supreme Court addresses appealability of class certification rulings: Microsoft Corp. v. Baker