The California Supreme Court refused to grant review, upholding a $21 million verdict against SF Weekly as a result of predatory pricing. Bay Guardian Co. Inc. had alleged that SF Weekly used profits from out-of-region papers to sell ad space below cost. The Defendants had appealed to the 1st Appellate District arguing that recoupment of losses was an essential element of a predatory pricing case under Section 17043 of California’s Unfair Practices Act. The appellate court held California law is distinct from its Federal counterparts because California requires intent, looking to the purpose of the scheme rather than the resulting harm.