From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Thomas v. Americredit Financial Corporation

United States District Court, N.D. California
Oct 22, 2007
No. C 07-02324 SI (N.D. Cal. Oct. 22, 2007)

Opinion

No. C 07-02324 SI.

October 22, 2007


ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS' MOTION TO STRIKE PLAINTIFF'S PRAYER FOR PUNITIVE DAMAGES


Before the Court is defendants' motion to strike plaintiff's prayer for punitive damages found in plaintiff's second amended complaint. The matter is scheduled for a hearing on November 30, 2007. Pursuant to Civil Local Rule 7-1(b), the Court determines that the matter is appropriate for resolution without oral argument, and VACATES the hearing.

Plaintiff's second amended complaint seeks punitive damages of $100,000 under the California Fair Debt Collection Practices Act. The statute permits only actual damages and punitive damages no greater than $1,000. Cal. Civ. Code § 1788.30. Defendants therefore seek to strike this portion of plaintiff's second amended complaint under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(f); plaintiff has stated that he does not oppose the motion. Having considered the papers submitted, and in light of plaintiff's statement of non-opposition to defendants' motion to strike, the Court hereby GRANTS defendants' motion to strike plaintiff's prayer for punitive damages.

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

Thomas v. Americredit Financial Corporation

United States District Court, N.D. California
Oct 22, 2007
No. C 07-02324 SI (N.D. Cal. Oct. 22, 2007)
Case details for

Thomas v. Americredit Financial Corporation

Case Details

Full title:GREGORY THOMAS, Plaintiff, v. AMERICREDIT FINANCIAL CORPORATION, DOES 1…

Court:United States District Court, N.D. California

Date published: Oct 22, 2007

Citations

No. C 07-02324 SI (N.D. Cal. Oct. 22, 2007)

Citing Cases

Hayes v. Asset Recovery Management Group, Ltd.

To state a claim under the "false name" exception, plaintiff must allege the defendants misrepresented…

Dayton Valley Investors v. Union Pacific Railroad Company

This is precisely the reason why Rule 26(a) requires a party to provide a category and computation of damages…