This is the first in a series of posts on the "statutory repeal rule" as interpreted by the California Supreme Court. The Court of Appeal opinions holding that Prop. 64 applies retroactively to pending cases all rely on this so-called "rule." I'm going to address the California Supreme Court cases chronologically in an effort to establish that the so-called "rule" is merely an application of the general principle that new statutes apply prospectively only, absent a very clear indication of legislative (or electoral) intent to the contrary.
This will make interesting reading to anyone following the issue of Proposition 64's effect on section 17200 cases in California. The first post is here from Kimberly at The UCL Practitioner.