Section 17203

Citation: Section 17203
Parent Document: Kraus v. Trinity Management Services, Inc., 999 P.2d 718 (2000)
Jurisdiction: California (state)
Effective Date: 2000-06-05
Original Source: https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/1159700/kraus-v-trinity-management-serv... ↗

Full Text

933 chars

Nor is the majority correct in assuming that, as a policy matter, "[w]hen restitution is made to a person in interest, fluid recovery is unnecessary." (Maj. opn., ante, 96 Cal.Rptr.2d at p. 494, 999 P.2d at p. 726.) Appropriate interested parties may not be individually identifiable, or identifiable at the time disgorgement is ordered. (See, e.g., Parkmerced, supra, 198 Cal.App.3d at p. 693, 244 Cal.Rptr. 22; Powers, supra, 2 Cal.App.4th at p. 343, 3 Cal.Rptr.2d 34.) It is neither possible nor desirable that we attempt to prescribe in advance all of the circumstances that might justify designating appropriate interested parties by class or description. Rather, as an equitable device, "`[t]he propriety of Fluid Recovery in a particular case depends upon its usefulness in fulfilling the purposes of the underlying cause of action.'" (Granberry v. May Investments (1995) 9 Cal.4th 738, 750, 38 Cal.Rptr.2d 650, 889 P.2d 970.)

Other Sections in This Document (353)

Full Text