Cal. Code Civ. Proc. § 337a defines “Book Account””
The term “book account” means a detailed statement which constitutes the principal record of one or more transactions between a debtor and a creditor arising out of a contract or some fiduciary relation, and shows the debits and credits in connection therewith, and against whom and in favor of whom entries are made, is entered in the regular course of business as conducted by such creditor or fiduciary, and is kept in a reasonably permanent form and manner and is (1) in a bound book, or (2) on a sheet or sheets fastened in a book or to backing but detachable therefrom, or (3) on a card or cards of a permanent character, or is kept in any other reasonably permanent form and manner.
“This section creates a ‘three-part statutory test’ for the existence of a book account:
(1) the existence of ‘the principal record of one or more transactions’ between the plaintiff/creditor and defendant/debtor;
(2) entries in the record that were made in the plaintiff/creditor’s regular course of business; and
(3) the record was kept in a reasonably permanent form and manner.”
W. Oilfields Supply Co. v. Goodwin, No. CV F 07-1863 AWI DLB, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 41234, at *10-11 (E.D. Cal. May 12, 2008).
“A book account is created by the agreement or conduct of the parties in a commercial transaction. Nonetheless, the mere recording in a book of transactions or the incidental keeping of accounts under an express contract does not of itself create a book account.” H. Russell Taylor’s Fire Prevention Service, Inc. v. Coca Cola Bottling Corp., 99 Cal. App. 3d 711, 728 (1979).
“[W]hether a book account is open or closed is a question of fact. ‘While an “open” book account has been defined as “‘[a]n account with one or more items unsettled,’” it also includes “‘an account with dealings still continuing.’” [Citation.] By contrast, a “closed” account is, according to Black's Law Dictionary, one “to which no further additions can be made on either side. . . .” Thus, it is clear that the “open” or “closed” nature of a book account turns not on the account balance per se, but on the parties’ expectations of possible future transactions between them.’” Cochran v. Rubens, 42 Cal. App. 4th 481, 485 (1996).
For form pleading see California Judicial Council form No. PLD-C-001(2) (“Common Counts”).
CALIFORNIA STATE COURTS
Supreme Court of California: Imperial Merchant Services, Inc. v. Hunt, 47 Cal. 4th 381, 397 (2009).
California 1st District: Interstate Group Administrators v. Cravens, 174 Cal. App. 3d 700, 708 (1985).
California 2d District: Filmservice Labs. v. Harvey Bernhard Enters.,
208 Cal. App. 3d 1297, 1307-08 (1989).
California 3d District: Gardner v. Rutherford, 57 Cal. App. 2d 874, 882-83 (1943).
California 4th District: Cochran v. Rubens, 42 Cal. App. 4th 481, 485 (1996).
California 5th District: H. Russell Taylor’s Fire Prevention Service, Inc. v. Coca Cola Bottling Corp., 99 Cal. App. 3d 711, 728 (1979).
California 6th District: None.
CALIFORNIA FEDERAL COURTS
United States Court of Appeal for the 9th Circuit: In re Roberts Farms, Inc., 980 F.2d 1248, 1252 (9th Cir. 1992).
Central District: Xerox Corp. v. A & M Printing, No. CV 12-00043 MMM (Ex), 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 74179, at *12 (C.D. Cal. May 20, 2013).
Eastern District: Sierra Kiwi, Inc. v. Rui Wen, Inc., No. 2:13-cv-1334-LKK-EFB, 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 160404, at *9-11 (E.D. Cal. Nov. 7, 2013); W. Oilfields Supply Co. v. Goodwin, No. CV F 07-1863 AWI DLB, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 41234, at *10-11 (E.D. Cal. May 12, 2008).
Northern District: ERTEC Envtl. Sys. v. RiverValley EcoServs., Inc., No. 13-01907-KAW,, 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 149810, at *8 (N.D. Cal. Sept. 20, 2013); Starnet International AMC Inc. v. Kafash, No. 09-CV-04301-LHK, 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 25062, at *26-28 (N.D. Cal. Mar. 8, 2011).
Southern District: Boon v. Professional Collection Consultants, No. 12-CV-03081-H (WMC), 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 151719, at *9 (S.D. Cal. Oct. 17, 2013).