Hurst v. Buczek: “Doing business” in California

870 F.Supp.2d 810 (2012)

Second Floor Corridor of the White House during the Renovation, 02/09/1950 — US National Archives

Summary

NOTE: This summary only addresses the analysis of ‘doing business’ in California as that is the only point relevant to the concept of ‘business’ under CCPA. Under the title “Case” below there is a transcription of the whole case.

A Company is ‘doing business’ in California (and therefore must registered as a ‘foreign entity’ before being able to defend itself from a lawsuit) where:

• Company is a “property preservation company” based in New York,
• It provides clients with property maintenance, repair, and cleaning services, typically for vacant, foreclosed homes,
• It contracts with workers in various states, including California, to provide such services, and
• While many of its clients own properties in California, none of its clients are based in California.

CASE

May 2, 2012.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Thomas E. Duckworth , Mark Christopher Peters , Duckworth Peters Lebowitz Olivier LLP, San Francisco, CA, for Plaintiff.

Alden John Parker , Nathan Huss Geronimo , Weintraub Genshlea Chediak , Sacramento, CA, for…