California Court of Appeal

In an action brought by the state against defendants seeking injunctive relief, restitution, and civil penalties under the California unfair competition law (UCL), and the California False Advertising Law (FAL), for operating a scheme in which defendants misrepresented that they would help customers obtain loan modifications from lenders and prevent foreclosure of the customers' homes, the trial court's permanent injunction against defendants and order of restitution are affirmed but the amount of penalties imposed on defendant Fasela must be recalculated, where: 1) the trial court did not err by issuing a protective order limiting the Attorney General's obligation to respond to thousands of special interrogatories; 2) the trial court did not err by receiving in evidence portions of the deposition transcripts of six of defendants' customers; 3) the trial court did not err by ordering defendants Sarpas and Fasela to pay restitution; 4) the award and amount of civil penalties against Sarpas are proper, the award of civil penalties against defendant Fasela is proper, but the amount of penalties against her must be recalculated; 5) defendants Sarpas and Fasela were not denied their due process rights to confront and cross-examine witnesses; and 6) the trial court did not err by receiving in evidence checks deposited into defendant company's bank account.

Appellate Information

• Decided 05/06/2014
• Published 05/06/2014

Judges

• FYBEL

Court

• California Court of Appeal

Counsel