• Kimberly A. Kralowec
    The Kralowec Law Group
    180 Montgomery Street,
    Suite 2000
    San Francisco, CA 94104
    Tel: (415) 546-6800
    Fax: (415) 546-6801

April 2015

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
      1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8 9 10 11
12 13 14 15 16 17 18
19 20 21 22 23 24 25
26 27 28 29 30    

« The Daily Journal reports | Main | S.B. 376 - UCL's public prosecutor provisions amended »

Monday, July 02, 2007


TrackBack URL for this entry:

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Two more new UCL decisions: Akkerman v. Mecta Corp. and Benson v. Kwikset Corp.:



In the Akkerman case there is a very brief discussion of injunctive relief under the UCL without the need for class certification. Any thoughts on that?

Kimberly A. Kralowec

You're talking about the "superiority" analysis on page 9 of the opinion. That part of the opinion could mean a couple of things:

(1) Injunctive relief may be obtained post-Prop. 64 without formal class certification.

(2) The court forgot to analyze the impact of Prop. 64 on the "superiority" prong (and also possibly overlooked Fireside Bank, which overruled the part of Frieman on which the Akkerman court relied; see this blog post for more).

Other ideas?

The comments to this entry are closed.

2015 Supreme Court Calendar



  • Nothing in this blog constitutes legal advice. If you need legal advice, consult an attorney in your jurisdiction. To read this blog's complete disclaimer, click here.

  • The UCL Practitioner
    © 2003-2015
    by Kimberly A. Kralowec
    All rights reserved.

  • Enter your email address:

    Delivered by FeedBurner

  • Header design by Webmotion
    Photos by Jack Gescheidt
    Powered by TypePad