Skip to main content
DRAFT FOR ATTORNEY REVIEW — NOT FINAL

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

Other Sections in This Document (353)

Full Text

937 chars
Levi Strauss itself was brought as a class action by the Attorney General on behalf of persons overcharged by a clothing manufacturer. The parties entered into a settlement agreement that established a fund of money to be repaid to the relevant consumers, but many did not file claims and a substantial amount of money was left after legitimate claims had been paid. We noted that the equitable doctrine of cy près provided a solution. After considering various forms that "fluid recovery" might take—including division among individual claimants, distribution to an appropriate governmental organization and the creation of a consumer trust fund—we remanded the matter, noting that "trial courts should have the full range of alternatives at their disposal" and that "disposition of the residue on remand is a matter within the discretion of the trial court." (Levi Strauss, supra, 41 Cal.3d at p. 479, 224 Cal.Rptr. 605, 715 P.2d 564.)