Tobacco Documents Online

dUL-14-99 01:03Pb1 FRONr • ® T-338 ?.t61t6 f-48B • a I G J.dioid Netieo 2 D.B.Ident s.q~ooiot qpt ddf oanr talm jwdtdd notiae aPntwtad unx*Hdpd Ad.nl diw4ct 3 cauet doddau6 k,&"s deddasDanftdpwK .rl~rrineDo aommwboi a 4MftKooaslu.iwt, 4 tban is readtsd banda. Deaeodant's qmoon, mads pmmm to Fsdmd Rulo of Sv9dsne 201, is S CpMMD. 6 7 1V. 6®NCLUSJON 6 Fa tho>re~s~R! wtbd liadn, daAeedas's r~iao w d~n~ir i~'aS1>~ 9 1® T8' I9 SO f9WMCRED. 11 11 13 f4 ,aS.~C.1 , DATS iD: 15 ~a 1 B CC: ALL ~i 1~9'P~RA7]tJDt38 ~ 17 1$ 19 ! 20 Zi 22 23 24 25 26 e 27 2$ -as. RECEIVED TImE JL8N.30. 3;45PP1 PRIIVT TIP£ IUY.3®. 3i99!'M

dllL-14-99 12:59PM FROM- ® T-33B P-Q2/?B f-dBB 0 tv0.691 P.2i16 ~ -9 f ~. ` ! 2 oc fTkt 29 !t?6 V03 3 4 S 8 >v:~ '.z9 7 B 9 U11A'PED STAT5B DISTRICT COVKT SOUTEiEBNt DISTRICT OF CALIFOiMA 0 to 11 AN N CASE iVO. 98CV138 i ARl,Fw i HA K FEILM nnd M i12 tsARYAN SWqM oBDBR L11~VYIIdG ~EFBND/WT'S 13 ~ P11wff, RVWWSD MflTION'CO Di81ASS ANO GR/INTINCiDEVISNUAW S _ 14 vs. 88QL18T FGW. IUA'ICYAL NOTIC$ iS is F`{paX.r rsw.s.w fNCQ~s-~s~rs~'1•~ a-~s~rs~'1•~a and DOES 1 to y !C®. ~ _~y. 17 18 19 20 21 Dr&dent PIu'mp Matm jnootponrpl6mupis the Vesmt motion to dieodss on May 24,1999. Pwmo trlod sm oppidafl on Jaaso 11. 1999" Ddbidqu %d s n%* 00 ruec 16, 1999. Both parties i7e repfraalted by counsel. I. HA.CtG3lOUhPD A. FActtnl Baakpoa>a+d 1 he Popowin8 5cy appov tc be unditputad. Pl.iaft ae the wife and childron of the ' PL'emilb' oppWqon was foue dsya iu. 9a rietstio^ of locat rnte 7.I (o), Add{doneIly, p1.is8tiFM' opposit'san nyrtrd tm inmrteat ccott (Svpadar Coutt of the Sptte oE'-caltftornis) In the cappolt. t~a~pite t1r doc~nda's inNrmitk., thii eaurt acrepted tho oppo~hson in order to turthart6o in~eroe of jurd_ ce by baah~p.sae~ to fuliy uldtqs thti9 impartsnt Isstta The court nocer, howevtr, ~Rfptsiooo~'= efiauld ~5ade by the nslea of ttu® cowtt ie all futur® ~ or risk non- tcCeptu~cs o ~mmRS snWor aenctiona. 4l~e RECEIVEEA TIhE .7LAY.9H. 3: 49PPT PF2IN' TINE 71kY.3e. 3e56PM

JUL-14-99 12:59P69 FROM- ® 7-$38 P.84/}8 P-4BB ® C a .; ~ .~ e I to Cilifoenia Civil Code §1415.45. 2 Fedaal law, hovsever. 8orent 9uewont olpiooedure is a diver:h sttit. 588 Hait°a v•o"m 3 380 U.S. 460, 470-74, Wftore the procedure is difectly aevar.d by the Federa{ Rulea of C'ian7 4 Procodute, ft todCtal tuks control. $CB Id.; iBB.YIiC ®1YIlIpIG~AEmd. TtIBrY r:>ti~- °'®°~.~ S"a 760 P.2d 910. 913 (9dt Cir. 1985), ew_ denW 474 U-S. 1060. Ta thie eate, the motion to 6dismias ie 6rvi& purwnt m Federal aute of Civi) Proeediue l2(hx6). a procedural deviw. I'bua ahir 7 court wo71 use ft federal law in Mvle*tp tWxOa' plaimA' aomplaiFn atates a rL6m apon whiah rai3af 8 ma}r be Stanted. 9 & Mottaa to Dlnnior 10 Feda'al Rute of C'ivll Proeodune 12(bX6) .Uow a eourt w dfandn a oomplaint Sor 11 deiiare to suce a claim upon wkch talief can be aanted. Such a dittniaoai can be 6aamd on oithr tfie 12 laalt of a coptizahle legat theory or tlro sbsenee of affi'detu Eicqt aUeQod uraler 4 aoglsisable Itqla9 13 eheory. gLmRr, ~ p•R~~ Petce nTs, 9o1f.2d 696,'699 (Bt1rC'a. 1990): ZsmHWRtda 136)ft- 14 a eompl.int.ho,+Hd not be dismissed for f.ftre to saeeo a claim tmlaw it appeara beyoed doubt thar 15 plslnWoottld pr®ve no aot of bess in snppart of his or bor elaim tbr rdier. 16 1u, 950 F.2d 1478, 1482 (9th t:ir.1991). To d'utetta wah prejudta, it maut appear to a aatanty tlNt 17 eho plavrdfwoitld ttot be altitMod oa reHdwalir an9 s®t ofber. sbat ¢add be proverL $pd$y. j&Op llt jndtli., 912 F:Zt9 291, 293 (9tlt C'ir. 1990), fdaJOIA 502 U.S. 921 (1991). In rpplying ft 19 atandard, the court notrs seac dl of ptaimitPs faonul aqegatians aa ttuem zxA2d1nmLi`,so" Im -V,, 20 jynjq9tl x~lyptttilajaeo 6t4F.2d 1244, 1245 (9th Cir, 19Bt1). 21 22 IIL DISCOSSI®PI . 23 The e* i,rie 6efor; this ceurt 4s whether or not eimanqea In Cal{tbrt,it Civll Cod. ¢1415.45 ' 24 that went ieto effd nn lanuuy 1, 1998 may be appUed ssttoaetively to the preaent caae, rvhere the ', 25 cawo of action aecnted and, was $1ed in October of 1997. i 26 Prior to its amandmont, Califanda Ctvil Coda §I714.45 (hatahuBee "Original §1714.45") ' 27 ptovided tolrcre mvntfaausera with vmy buad iouraarity taaat eivi/ IiabW for panonai itljatrioa whiah II 28 were aawed by eiQaroetoe. Seaion 1714,45(a) peovided t1+st °fi]n a product IisbiEisy actiat4 a -3- REGEIVkM TIME JLN.96. 3a45PM P'RINT TIME 3UN.5¢. 3'SWPl

Jl1L-1d-99 12:59PM FROM- 7-338 P.d3118 F-d88 0 •N. 28 dxea+ed, Virgil Joo 14rler. Mc Fa1.r dimd am yoa betbre the prsasnt sct8on was 81ed, in October of 1996. Th1e fint amalded aoteptsint aptas a jingk esuse ef setlon ior wronsfui desth, orieieg 6nrn the aUesd atriat liabiliey of dsfimdant. plaintitfs slte8e eMt Mr. 8alet amolted the mljor6ly of b!o liti: and vMbrn7iin1931. 8. lroeedoral8ukpro9.d PlsintiBic 6P.d the preasast wtion as a Cmm compHaint in Supaior Court ofCalitbtais, Cotnnty of San Aisgo on Osaab.r 23,1997. Da6Nant was aetvod an or about Jirwiaty 1 S.1998. On JYlwary 26, 1998, defaldant ramovsd ibds sulon duo to diversity ofcitimmldp between tha pettia. On or about March 6, 1999, p11Bndffi 61od a 16nt ittlanded ootrlp4iiet. Defendant fslad a tnotion to dismiu on Marclt 16t199i wbieb was .,asame{y inaisac ta tke. ,notion beYbr® rho court pae®e®dy. On Apri127, I998, ehis eourt ordaad rhot nlation off eNartl6r as- moot paiding notifienion as to t1Jm action from th® Multiilistrico iit6pation Pansl. , Defbadaeu ®od a renewed motion to diamiu tm May 24,1999. P4ahMopptuc. In its o+oeion, defiedsat arypies tfm plsiadb' ah®e h ehwtooity bleted ppr.uot to t6e version I~i4 of Calilhrnia Civil Code §k4tS45 that was ur, nff= whnt piaie6dl' arAion was 6/.d an OZtobsr 23, 1997. rna4uillk aileps tltu a subuquent d1an11v in i*141S,431iRed tUa u.atoy bar, a1uW tUat the later vsraion of 91415.45 ntu®t be appliod tetroaodvely. 11. STANDARD OF IAW A. Appllsa6k Law lt ia weII ataled tlus a SedaW disuiet onart sitting in divaraty must apply the wftarRivo state iaw to tho itaa dsims btdbre ic. Sm t. 664 9.24 1136, 1141 (9th Cir. 1982X Czm ,y` 103 F.3d 997,899 (9Eh Cit. 1996~ Spod6c.lsy, tln coaut routt applp the product IiabsToty law oftho fomtn am In nltina on a diepo3itivo rnotion SW." >';*+to V Ql...n SLne 401d.3d 1063, 1065; Vw ti.. rv'ti Ea: 457 F.2d 1262, 1264 (9th Cit. 1972), CV...dQ~jd 409 U.S, 876 (i97Z).. In tAe ptesene case, defdtdm ratwvad pNinrW action to fedaal mwt ftom the Aato ooi0t. Aerordin& Ca6foflpa aqabAta9etive law will be appTed repasd9nli liability in tobacco litigation unl the retroaotiv" sppfiqttion of un«ardmmt. - 2 - swwts. RECEIVE) TIME JLH.3B. 3~a9Pn PR2NT TTrE SUN.30. 3t5flPM

AlL-ld; 99 01 tOOPM fROM- 0 ® 0 T-88B P.OP/f6 F-466 >ftat8talS/ COnattllCrlon. 'N C4R1'01101{id fy OPl611fl the intent Oer}M J.CSif1NYrE !o as to WRG1Uage tIM pUrpoiB oYtllr liw." Sp.,,y v'..m IKy-a 39 Ct1.3d 46, 51(198Sxquarcn8 21 CaL3d 650, 658 (1978'). a The oouK s1wu+W lo®k to the tact of the stllwfq ®vin8 uwlti, ordinsey mn.rdnS to the tanqurEs amployad'ne Fnmft she stauatoA go idL ac 52. 5ignifloanoa should be 8ivan to cvery qnot'd, p1n sso, eonernm snd pat of du set iua aceR.in6nB t.giet.dve porpore, and should. av®id a eon.wet9oo which would raldor aome woMs maaabow or wrplasaga $n id. Firt+Uy, the Aatutory 1a1Qu48e "mug be oonstrued In eontsotr, keeft in mind the nAtur® snd obvious purpose of the astate whae they splkar'n IL T}r lowj iarrartco ie Anedod $171415(f) rwds "(ijt Is sbo tbe iulaloa of the Looalantts to el.rify that *= dsfms 1W ras or art brov& shall be daaaaln.d oa t6oir maria, wnehait the lnipasidon afeny cJsiln ofwpuory b.r or coe8oriral de*nta" (un4aiina in aeiOPf, otha anplwuis added). Thiab saniatca, when ®vsn ita ordinay ewsl6ep, danonsaftes thot Altiendad §1714.45(f) ls sn acpmrarossdrity povYislan. The aerranec aWassiy aatn that tbe.maldmants to §1714.45 .re iotqlcLd to ><rlp t®b.ceo companies ofstawtory immtndtlr and dyt tll dailns dIW be detam#I+cd on the roatts. it is eyosr tlat the irNlne of dhe tqlIpl.ane ebtt Aeruded §1714.4S mmpfa.ly namvae •sny ddm oftoauIIO.y bv or atqorica! defff4e" dnc tobscto prodseces aloyed underOrlpal §1714.45. That the T.egl.Wotm ieuasded Amended § 17l4.4S to operus retreutirdy to Strip tobiaoe coropania ofth® aswtory immunity ssutai undsr origiasl j1714.45 is auds alarby the ylle oetlu pasl tasse"wers" iA ArnenAed ¢1714.45(f). iflbo LsgifLturO hed 3rltended that Amwded Q1714.45 apply only to clsima brou& sAer it..(l6ctivs decs, aamuly 1, 1948, tJtare would be no rwed to espiidtJy =tp thlt d*u dot "wera or iro brouW' srr onnaed by AwAad.d § 1714.45. 7ndeEd, timf cawwoodd 6e 8oa'rid to na.d tho word. "wvs or erd' out of tb.e Wt+tte ut order to ibd tiNt Amendcd §1714.45 wo intcndad to apply only profpeotivdy, to elwlu fikd aft Janoary 1, 1998. A coestnwtioll vhidt vironld ramdat some wordb nmdegks or auplu.W ahoold be avoided by the coun. S811$tdu8a 38 Cs1,3d a 52. Additiosully, the irgielsaurc'o insvu tha eho bill apaate raao.etivety ils dear vvhan tBe rtstutory bnWAW ie rosd aonteztnally bpide dl of the language of Atnaaldad § 1714.45. The firat 7YCVWe Rr=IVEa TSI""E JlN.3B. 2;49PM PRYPR TIM ]LYV.39. 3: S9PM

JUL-14-99 01:01PM FROM- 0 ® r-836 P.66/f6 F-466 0 0 a swtmca of Amsndad §1714.45M tetdt "()t iu tho intndon of ths L.gNirtun in .wdir>6 ths snxadnwtts...to this seodon...to declare that thora a,dets no statutory bar to tobsaeo ta4tad penon.t injor/, wrotxil dauh, or ®thef tort daims spinC tobaeco mvwfletute>7...by GGfottis 11no1ter8 who have sutfcred itpuriea, danqgm or iarurrcd rests uisinp from the promopon, matk.ang, 1de, or eonsutnptinn of tobamo produas." This tongusge, gtvw its plain meaft ind'wtes a clear legidtdive intent to retnove any statutory bar, The use of LM put tenso in the phs'oae "YOOkan Who heve ~ited iAjtJaievs ."indiGetof titalo the Fpptlstwr intemtcd thnt ttr mondntesrcf to 31714.45 be retrotctivety appLad to itdutsa that were fsed a aeau~ 6drma the pawgo ofMrondad §1714.45. Wite tha stuute hnanded to sppbr to eFshm that amruad or were tiled after lamesy 1, 1998, the i,o&luiue would not netd to include isn~ indicating tJw pan inJuda aand aetlans vrao rmhia do scope otAmer+dad 11714.45. To rad t1n statute w.ppty4ng only to actiore 8ted after lsmtuy 1.1991, tlii" e,oun would hsve to ignae the wotds"have adhCCd" in Afidrkd §it714.45(fl. Rwdin=thil lpnyuoge in cotftc6ion adth thsbtod longusga whiah statas tMt Antlf" 11714.43 ii Wand06 to tCRloYe "etty W to Wii f&Nt the tot,uco coznpanees, ft impmufm i tiwL Atnanaoa §1714.45M appues t nrwtivdy. In som, an analysia of the lsneuaSqc of Anratdod j 1714.45M datronotrars that AtAaepdod §1714.45(f) iu a refroastiviry proviaiaa. ICeaping On ttlind t$e na0sfe and obvious pntpote otAalorKiod § 1714.45, tbia-wut finds thst tkL.opWstun tmde e door statement of intent tlMt Ataended §t714.45 spply ssBrnsctivoty. Sa StyWCA, 38 Cat.3d at S2. This couR must affiaom th.t purposa- fig j& 2. The Le{WaNve $ttt®ty of Aanfadad s l'14.4'J. Altemativaly, the eoutt also $nda t}wt the le6i.lativ. ha3toty of the snwtdowsntb to §I714.45 vory eteaeiy indiesras do L.glAlatore intaided do tfw sntendanmu be qpplied tatrmtctivaty. 'i'tda AndiAg :uppotts the above raditgottAe cxpeea tarnr of the provisioq snd mq also suanda an indapaadaot gtound upon whtcJt reaoacavo application naty 6e juoqi6ad. The Cslifornia Supreme Court has noted thu'[vr]e have ocpiidtiy pabordlnitad Mo gmnat.l prewmption against retroaceivz apptieuion of atatutp to tha trsnseaideat caoon of st;tuWry wnattvetion that the design of tlro Legd"ro be g:vga sffet." ja$C.BOWjCL 16 Cd.3d at 587. Abunt sntroactivoly provlsi®n the le8'sfative 6istory oftho bill. hovrwer, most very eles4Y 'htdlcate -7. !lCV67i RECEIVED TIME ]IAN.30. 3149F'M F'RINT TIME JL9Y.30, 3,SePM

JUL-14-99 OI:OOPlA FR0M- T-338 RDB/76 F466 6 20 21 22 23 ~ 24 under otigiatal §17t4.45? Neither side dtsputes that plaintitb Alcd their ection belbre Amcndod §1714.A5 bepme effeetive. "A bawe canen oFmwtory inteepnetstion is th.t saaetM do no ops+neta nttto.p.cxivaly unW the UW.uve plainly intended them to do so. A aeaaute has rarospecdve afloct when it subst.ntiaqy clungss the leea] wnw quenca of pan svents." aMtemfissidp18nir v SUe®s®r +l15 Csi.4th 232, 243 (1997)(citations oenittcd), If the L4slatUns deuly iesnds tbr a mRawte to operate ratro.aively. the coaast ntust eany out that intmt mJeu duo pree.n proteaione preeent the court frem doing so. A court musS detertniae vbodfr the IeaFslaure intended the ststute to be retrocctivdy epplied prior to addrrsft any poseible ootuaitudond eonratu. $pe $=gWMob,w Sunerier Couet 44 Ca1.3d 1168, 1206 (1988), A¢COtdln*, thie alwlt qef11 CfymiUe wrEwBhe[ the Legislature clearly intendad that Amended §1714.45 be eppiied retrpS¢tively. Tf tlqt question it answered in the adfirmative, theo she cautt w31W esamine wisather retruactive applicedon is prechrded by duo process cOnsiderationt A. I.e=Watino Inten t ite=ardiwf itetroaeeive opereMos of Amndmeaa to J1714.45. The conwewn Isw underat.ndin8, eod'ified 4n CaGtbmia Civil Codo 13, is tlw legislafm provisions are Intended to opersto prospectively unlees the 1e8idautre aoeptesw a di8lratt intention. $a gzangda®$, 44 Ca1.3d at 11t98-9; asibp IS Ca1.4th at 243. The i.wsl.nue intent that the ststato appty retroietively enay be divined 8rom: 1) an etcptsst reeroacdvity provision in the ststue; or 2) the leysluiva hinory of th. stAatte, provided tlus the extr9edc saurcds tnake it vory dear that the Loigi,tlatura 'ttuended the atatuto to opaue retroaetiveiy. an W 1. Tle 8sptess Lswptp or the StataM This court finds that the leaitlstum 6i the expeme lAMLMP of t>to eptwtq iraended that ArnaWed §1714.45 be applied rataoaotively to cases that acerued or ware filed prior to the 7anusty 1, 1998 eBPaLtive date of Amended 11714.43. $m AAtOnded §3714.45(n. A - 25 In baapreting the l.ngutge of AtnaWM g 1714.45, this wutt is guidod by cvuin principles of ,26 27 Plaintiff ' Pht[saiflY' thtee paae opposition tlil: to respond tm the lbeqrardod by d®fendmt. a' oppoeition 6ri.t' consiets t.rgely oP a quot. of § 1714.45(f and savmtal unralatod Rryutnents 28 which Atnend , sre oottchuory and/or itvdevant. Ylaintittprohda no qsesmarc for its sripuntaK that ed $1714.45 should Ae ntrtnsatsvdy appli.d to eaes btouahtt by privam iodtvQuslt while Oaigina l 11714.43 waa in eS'a¢t. -5- 9.avnr PRINT TA'E JUP1.30. RECEIVED TSME JLqY.3®. 3: 49R1

JUL-14-99 01:OOPM FROM- i-33B P.P5/f6 F-488 • ® r = ~j f lo Flt 0 s q J nsanufltoturer or seller slsdl not be liabte i!: (1) (tjhe produa is inherentbr unssfo w,d the product ia know to be unsafE by the ord'mary eonaumer.,. and (2) [t]he product is a conunon consumer produet inteeaded for petaonsl coqsump8on, such as...tobacea.... Oetyitrl § 1914.49(b) detirrcd a"prroducc tiabiGey saime" broady to inctude "any aesion for injury or death apuaed by a ptoduat, aceept that the tetm doos not lnclude an action based on a manuAaurinp defeot or breach oran expeas a:amnty." Original §1714,45(c) noted that the sarsion applied to all actions pending on or commenced after Jnotsiy 1, 1988. Furthv, Qriqind §1714.45 was interpreted as providing nearly complete imnntniey to tohaao dsPmdsnts. $pe w.=OijGi19,T*= =.y~"''°,~ P r 206 Ca1.I1pp.3d 4K 41;7 (1989). - FSaet6vo Januuy 1. 1998, CaCdtortda's lap}dsptra amaded § 1714-4S to suip the inutwnuy fconi parotrl injuny aR that Orfginal §17a4.45 c®nfared upo® tobrocu msmficntrpy. $o Cal, civil Code 11714.45 (DeminF Supp, 1998) (`Miqtdnd f 1?14,45*). Several clwnQa wa+e tnade to the atanrra. Tn Antendcd 11714.45, the legislaape delded the word'Yobseee" ftm the yat ofooc0utnee products ths manufacmrs and sde of whioh ware prantod imonmity under the auwue. As 41714.45(sx2). S.eond, the tepislature added a aeetion whieh exptidtly stams that Amandod 41714.45 "doa not e><enipe ths aww6cara or sale ofm6sneo peedur,ts by tob.eao msnuPacturets..,flvin products 8wbi6ty actiona." §17i4.43(b). Fiesily, the lt>pislstwe addadd a subwction M to §1714,45. Subaectiott (4) mta; _ _ It is the intanfion oFtiie l.e®'a/atwe in the amandand+ts to aubdiv7siana (a) tad (b) o4thia aection adopted at th1199 7-9f Sasion ta dedar® tlwt iharo e~dst. ao statutary 6arto taharroo-rNatod~~iaguty, wrongNl da~tth, or atliar toR eltimf yaout tohaam auns9~traa aadtlrir tuooeqon in itaataK by Ca6(oetds aniokars ot otbm triro Ltvs ~+EErsd or ittourad ogt~64 daenl~, ot cosre ari,t~ tivn th. ptnmoGon, nwhatu~, a.lo, or oan oTtobaeso p~s. It is also ti1C iMAit10ll /~the t0 Olari~y fh{t e~a/nM~ M~a60 Ot afe hf04~ft b r0orat~d~~~phad~in~o~e ~ n a~"any dtdm oistftutory Dd.ndant movw to dismiee the first ameaded menp6aint on the tpounda that plaintiili' dam is scatutorUy b.rred beaause the cause of aetion ascru.d, and the aetion was filed, while OriQins! § 1714.45 was in efact. pefendant argues that tha btoad invnunity Som pettonal iajwry suit that is grant+od to tohaeeo nnns6eturera pvraunt to Origind §1714.45 appUeo to plaieft' essc, Pluitttit;s mpinnin tltft fho Anxsidod §1714.45 opaeeser ratroaetively to strip dofaadant offthe imtmusity VamW -4- D RKMIVED TIP£ JIJN.30. So49PM PRINT TIME ".30. 3* 5" srews. J

JIIL-14-99 01:02PM fROM- T-$38 P.73/78 F-4f8 y ® ® 1 2 27 as mduded an Q>W= raroaoterity peavisloa in thc sqsuoe. Iqdditlendiy, as wd1 be dbwsaed below. th0 juaeMaatlow for rehoaatavo appt'icah'on of Maandad 11714.45 are sebspmdsl and dearly indcstod by the Lqlislature. Tho La*slams'e lndtetteb t}raet pnbllo health was bda8 dattw6.d by dw tobaoee maovfisottoff, tbat tobasw numufteturm had mieled the pobTu, aad that the imnwnity grseted under Otionsl j1714..45 shwid be retooved 61van drie fas~t's $n Csloforiua CmroWttes Amslyps, &4ay 21, 199'7, $wato Commitux On ladieiay Hill No, SR 67. '[Les, wdilme the altuadoe in Mpspr, the LeQiatstuca in the pmsam wo ind•ustal why ft ana ssklris this atian. Ciiveo tAe roawsu for th. lagwaasns't ad7ons, the ranaval efthc Ltui.utity gamod undsr Ori" 11714,45 eaanot be ssid to be arbitnry. MqIIlati dwrobrq is of fimitad uso ro this aoeui. Deftadant dw raTies on rjM9` v rUdL 67 Cd.App.4th 693, 697 (1994 tto wppon sha propostt3ea thst vened eigteta nmt roi be a$eoted by teaoapiva lqp.laimi. The ftdo ooues, boweva. anly bdd t>st abse.t an Mestiae dst the law is ietwwied m opentm rm oadively t6a aoaes will not abridge dw suDqpnivo Tildtes of psrtiM. As iadirated sbov., t/aa acant hss fimm that the Leqiskwre providad an rstensstrvity provision in dro slstuts. AOM of aaas.egn^mnStheabifiq+oftlr 1.e&atun0 to retromrivety appbr chanpa to stuwos af+uryrnwem is hdpW in anflyvlp$1hs pFesCm Ci80. In SmLtian®,$i:- C..O..Wwn V D6nfwim 325 U.S. 304 (1945) tA® SLpaems Cewt held efiat tfie urnntaity tcas ruit tbal a ddimdm aegogs as a result of the awstiea of aaturca oflindWion is not s"oiQht." ld& at 314. la Odlp4,jj{rip: CpMM 200 Ca1.App.3d 1375,1393 (i9{t), a CaUtbetda oourt emmad tlne *Aro is no eonstiwd®net baroisr ta a+Kr"vo app&atiiaa af amura wlddl reYivs a tuottbemd dvl eaue o(aeqon. Tho cows statod tloac "[s) pemndsl dshndast has eo wsed ri61K in dw amaa of repr caeftmd !iy id® bp*e96e t?Yt a laWsit i8siftt Aim appaua to be baerad." ZO» i1C." 209 CaLApp.3d 928, 833 (1919~ E71 Ca1.App.3d 727, 734 (1915). In disaussinS why ststutes of limitd7ms do not ueste fundanwwal Y%ft4 the Slaprane Court sexted 'tt]hey eoprosent a publie policy abatt eho privilepa to Ktl6atd' tatler thsn addnusin6 the uodeelyiaR swbstantive issyes of a dvl suit. $a e`~•-_,.,~,+OWS11L 329 U.S. at 314. Whue thcse oases diacws s pia ceducal daviet, Wtutes of Ihnitat6oea, the uaderlging sna{yeis e 1 -1'E. 91CV131 PRIIYT TIM N!. 3®. 3 i g7PM RECEI~W TI ME SLN . 30. 3: 4SPM

RIVrd-99 91:O1PM FROM- ® ® T 336 P. f6/f6 F-dB6 J C e 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 te4toac&dy.besart specific hngosgc avas clauly.n iosr!e ameidetad by the Leji.tsauro. It is totling, ahat the veq rAct 4mendment to S8 67 entriled a tinafs, wbatataial chatp to tha taet of eha legllSRiotl_ Th®1°pROiCQY1L)/ pfoVition 41w is now Cod&d it Amencled f 1714.45(fl qlas added. ft 1997si7L Ttut CA s.33. 67, Aptil 16, 1997 van6on (eddilno, vet6atiqlL the text th.t is now WtKfied ir Amorled §1714.45(0). The loglenl eotielu:ion fmm this wm of aveme is tha tM adeGeion oftho Aptit 16.1997 faWosedvity providon to SB 67 was a diroce reepon.e to the conoarne s9licitiy rairod at the April t, 1997 hearing. 17ws, the 1oggadve hietory olArtrnded #1y14.45 ettongly wpporte readinfi subtoction (0 es a neuwaivity pmisioo. AdditiqwUy, ths aril to be aamt+d'ted aad the ptlbGa policy Wesider.tioau which tuppottnd dln pusssp ®f S8 67 auppott a 66Sdil4 thtt 8 vros itRended to oporstm raRou+dvely. 'Lhs bil was intended tu oompiaety tepe.l the aatutory itanWnity gantod uudes Orifiintl §1714.45 atd to t'eeton ptodttw Gab7ity law to pre4ON6ina1 11714.45 st.ndardr- $pp CaftmY4 Committee Ama(yeia, May 21.1997, SeNrto Commitwe on Sittd'ici.ry SiU No. 58 67. Additiaully, the a>kaft Zam bebiad thn blfi was addtestod by thc bilI's wthoa sa fvRows: Evidsnac has sow beoome av+Mle, tatowina tob.oeo ootn ee tnsyr bave doGbetasiY eaadpuhted ttttt lavd of meotine, a f~oweA Ulr edna entnlwaeo praduest so ee to aeQe w[ xtrtain ed~eaoti ah wiwfcera. Yn evidattce dwwr >!wt toB.eoo r.etnpaaip bave sppenadwlly StppteWOd and de~~onn~eat~ e~bout mgbnnxdm con~q uice~i o[ta6eoeo~"$s'~~.p~ of As a 6eoanC n:te, the rnotiva of individwl laSisletore may tsot be congdorod ie aecwtaining tne masniag of bitl. Sp6 BaKseb •16 G1.3d at $90. tiawovcr, etaten~t+rts or (attas thss tlhtda to argutnents ptesaued, in favot of the paaagts of a 6tl(, avan when wtittoa by legielrtots, ttWr be prefeatted to shed Ggbe on tho debate vonraundieS the paaeyp of 6 bll. $Op id. Betatr the sbovo letta wa+ direetly i>sqnd as a ststauant ma fiwor or ptwp of SH 67, tt dialo dxmVcset 8fiht on the 1.eq,pYetute•s belWtlw tlte ewYlealas ofianquiteblo conduct by tobaeno conVaeios tnandated Pemoving the 6tant oFitttmnniry provided by Utigind §1714.45. in eddition to tha lnequfteblo eoUduet. the dtbte ax.nunding the pwage of SS 67 indiea= tlrt p~lls hahh iald publit ~b+ta mt~tts.nitnatod tho La~lWve to ta in thie cas®. Aaeong the qpguttrents made in aappon of the pasaase of 88 67 were tlut: Iiundtods oY millions of doUot3 ve spa+t annu.lly by federal, teato vod local -9- R£CEIVFD TIME Jutl.30. 3s49pM PRI1Y7 TIP9E ]UN.30. a I SSP1 9WV17t 0