Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Class Action Blogs -> The UCL Practitioner
(866) 635-2689 for Personal Injury or (866) 635-9402 for Criminal Defense
Find a Local Lawyer
Divorce (866) 635-6190
Personal Injury (866) 635-2689
Criminal Defense (866) 635-9402
Class Action
: The UCL PractitionerReview granted in Yabsley v. Cingular Wireless
By Kimberly A. Kralowec
On Thursday, November 19, 2009, the Supreme Court issued a "grant and hold" order in Yabsley v. Cingular Wireless, no. S716146, "pending consideration and disposition of a related issue in Loeffler v. Target Corp., S173972." (Hyperlink added.) Here is the statement of the issue:
Does article XIII, section 32 of the California Constitution or Revenue and Taxation Code section 6932 bar a consumer from filing a lawsuit against a retailer under the Unfair Competition Law (Bus. & Prof. Code sections 17200 et seq.) or the Consumers Legal Remedies Act (Civ. Code, section 1750 et seq.) alleging that the retailer charged sales tax on transactions that were not taxable?
This is the UCL "unlawful" prong case in which I thought the opinion contained several non-outcome-determinative errors. That was the primary basis for my depublication request for CAOC, but it seems clear that review was granted because of the underlying tax law issue raised in the case, which is the same as the issue in Loeffler. Either way, the opinion is no longer citable precedent.
For more on the case, including links to some of the briefs, see these blog posts.
Full post as published by The UCL Practitioner on November 23, 2009 (boomark / email).
Cell Phone Early Termination Fees
How to recover billing errors
FDA Issues Update on Safety Review Orlistat
Orlistat FDA Issues Update on Safety Review
Novatel Wireless, Inc
401(k) / ERISA Stock Fraud
Aurora Loan Faces Class Action over Mortgage Review Services
Aurora Loan Faces Class Action over Mortgage Review Services
FDA Review of Prostate Cancer Treatment Prompts Warning of Risk for Diabetes
Prostate Cancer Treatment FDA Review Prompts Warning of Risk for Diabetes
Xigris
Study Prompts FDA Safety Review
Sprint Nextel Corp.
allegedly defrauded wireless customers by charging unspecified roaming fees.

Summary Judgment of Noninfringement Granted
Another Consumer Arbitration Agreement Bites the Dust
Madness on the Right of Publicity Front:
Judge Rules that AT&T Class Action may Proceed
Ind. Decisions - Tax Court issues two rulings today in cellphone sales tax challenge







