AB 325: Cartwright Act: violations.

Official summary

Legislative Counsel’s Digest (official, as of the latest version). Written by nonpartisan legislative staff; reproduced verbatim.

Existing law establishes the Attorney General as the head of the Department of Justice, with charge of all legal matters in which the state is interested, except as specified. Existing law imposes various requirements on the Attorney General related to consumer protection, including, among others, the supervision of charitable trusts and the enforcement of antitrust laws. Existing law, commonly known as the Cartwright Act, identifies certain acts that are unlawful restraints of trade and unlawful trusts and prescribes provisions for its enforcement.

Existing law requires a complaint or cross-complaint to contain, among other things, a statement of facts constituting the cause of action, in ordinary and concise language.

This bill would instead provide that in a complaint for any violation of the Cartwright Act, it is sufficient to contain factual allegations demonstrating that the existence of a contract, combination in the form of a trust, or conspiracy to restrain trade or commerce is plausible. The bill would provide that a complaint for any violation of the Cartwright Act is not required to allege facts tending to exclude the possibility of independent action.

This bill would also make it unlawful for a person to use or distribute a common pricing algorithm as part of a contract, combination in the form of a trust, or conspiracy to restrain trade or commerce. The bill would make it unlawful for a person to use or distribute a common pricing algorithm if the person coerces another person to set or adopt a recommended price or commercial term recommended by the common pricing algorithm for the same or similar products or services in the jurisdiction of the state. Because the bill would expand the scope of activities prohibited by the Cartwright Act, the violation of which is punishable as a crime, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program.

The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement.

This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.

Sponsors

Sponsors by party (alphabetical): Democratic 2

“Support” is shown only as formal sponsorship recorded by the legislature. Roll-call votes are available on the official bill page.

Recent official actions

1. October 6, 2025Chaptered by Secretary of State - Chapter 338, Statutes of 2025.
2. October 6, 2025Approved by the Governor.
3. September 24, 2025Enrolled and presented to the Governor at 3 p.m.
4. September 12, 2025Senate amendments concurred in. To Engrossing and Enrolling. (Ayes 54. Noes 18. Page 3371.).
5. September 12, 2025In Assembly. Concurrence in Senate amendments pending.
6. September 11, 2025Read third time. Passed. Ordered to the Assembly. (Ayes 29. Noes 9. Page 2905.).
7. September 8, 2025Read second time. Ordered to third reading.
8. September 5, 2025Read third time and amended. Ordered to second reading.
9. September 2, 2025Read second time. Ordered to third reading.
10. August 29, 2025Read second time and amended. Ordered returned to second reading.
11. August 29, 2025From committee: Amend, and do pass as amended. (Ayes 5. Noes 2.) (August 29).
12. July 14, 2025In committee: Referred to APPR. suspense file.