CA · jury_instructions
CACI No. 3332
Affirmative Defense to Locality Discrimination, Below Cost
Sales, Loss Leader Sales, and Secret Rebates—Functional
Classifications
[Name of defendant] claims that any [locality discrimination/below cost
sales/loss leader sales/secret rebates] proven by [name of plaintiff] [is/are]
within the law because they apply to different classes of customers. To
succeed, [name of defendant] must prove all of the following:
1. That [name of defendant] created different classes of customers,
such as [broker/jobber/wholesaler/retailer/[insert other]];
2. That customers in the different classes performed different
functions and assumed the risk, investment, and costs involved;
3. That the difference in [price/rebate/discount/special
services/privileges] for [product/service] was given only in those
sales where the favored buyer performed the function on which
the claim of a different class is based; and
4. That the difference in price was reasonably related to the value of
such function.
New September 2003
Provenance
- Source
- courts.ca.gov
- Retrieved
- 2026-08-20
- Edition
- caci-2023
- Content hash
f6dce525ed5aba9f5c873f954b71a250affa0a2e4b095bc108c60703c0afb76b
The link goes to the issuing authority’s own document — the one we read to produce this record. Where a source publishes whole titles rather than sections, your browser may need a moment to jump to the provision.
Unofficial copy of government-published law, reproduced from official sources with full provenance. Not an official publication; verify against official sources before relying on it in a filing. Records in the 'guidance' corpus, and only that corpus, are sub-regulatory (interpretive guidelines, survey procedures) and are not binding law. Validity bounds follow each jurisdiction's declared temporalBasis.