There are a couple of things that may facially appear to mean something but that actually mean nothing of the sort.
So, for example, in this case, we see Justice Richli pointedly refer to Section 3523 of the California Civil Code, which states: "For every wrong there is a remedy." But, as Justice Richli rightly (though perhaps sadly) notes, this is by no means in fact the case. (She doesn't actually say that, of course, but that's essentially her point.) There are actually tons of wrongs without a remedy. Or, perhaps more accurately, there are lots and lots of wrongs that don't create private legal rights. Like the one in this case.
So even though Section 3523 is a "maxim" of California jurisprudence, it's really quite meaningless.
I might add, by the way, that this is a perfect case in which to establish this point. Because it involves a company called the "Mega Life and Health Insurance Company". A company that I happen to know a tiny bit about, having had a couple of (unfortunate) clients who purchased the cheap coverage offered by this entity. Continuing the line of "things are not always what they purport to be," let me just say that Mega Insurance (1) is not a "mega" (or even large) company, and (2) assuredly does not offer "mega" insurance. Far from it.
