Peterson v. Cellco Partnership"/>
ADVERTISEMENT



Google Peterson v. Cellco Partnership" id="sbi">       

Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Class Action Blogs -> The UCL Practitioner

OR PHONE (866) 635-1838 for Bankruptcy Help, (866) 635-6190 for Divorce,
(866) 635-2689 for Personal Injury or (866) 635-9402 for Criminal Defense

Find a Local Lawyer

Bankruptcy (866) 635-1838
Divorce (866) 635-6190
Personal Injury (866) 635-2689
Criminal Defense (866) 635-9402

Bookmark

Class Action

: The UCL Practitioner

Recent UCL "injury in fact" decision: Peterson v. Cellco Partnership

By Kimberly A. Kralowec

ADVERTISEMENTS

In Peterson v. Cellco Partnership, ___ Cal.App.4th ___ (Jun. 26, 2008; pub. ord. Jul. 21, 2008), the Court of Appeal (Fourth Appellate District, Division Three) held that the trial court properly sustained the defendant's demurrer without leave to amend. It determined that the plaintiff had not alleged sufficient facts to establish that he suffered "injury in fact" within the meaning of the UCL's standing provisions.

Full post as published by The UCL Practitioner on August 29, 2008 (boomark / email).

Bloggers, promote your law blog by nominating your blog for inclusion in USLaw.com's Law Blog Directory and RSS Reader. Benefits described.
Related Law Articles

Lawsuits and Settlements

Related Searches

























































































































US Law
#1 Online Legal Resource













Your Blog Subscriptions
Subscribe to blogs

10,000+ Law Job Listings
Lawyer . Police . Paralegal . Etc
Earn a law-related degree
Are you the author of this blog? Adding USLaw.com to your Blogroll increases relevance. You qualify to display a USLaw Network badge.
Suggest changes to this blog's description or nominate another for inclusion. Register for updates.


Practice Area
Zip Code:

Contact a Lawyer Now!






0.0154 secs (new cache)