CONTACT ME


  • Kimberly A. Kralowec
    Schubert Jonckheer Kolbe & Kralowec LLP
    Three Embarcadero Center,
    Suite 1650
    San Francisco, CA 94111
    Telephone: (415) 788-4220
    Facsimile: (415) 788-0161
    Email: uclpractitioner@gmail.com

July 2009

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 31  

Disclaimer


  • 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
    © 2003-2009
    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

« Supreme Court grants review in another Prop. 64 "injury in fact" case: Meyer v. Sprint Spectrum | Main | California Attorney Guidelines for Civility and Professionalism »

Friday, August 17, 2007

New federal decision re catalyst theory: Trew v. Volvo Cars of N. Am., Inc.

In Trew v. Volvo Cars of North America, LLC, E.D. Cal., Civ. No. S-05-1379 RRB EFB (order filed 07/31/07), United States District Judge Ralph R. Beistline granted final approval of a class action settlement and awarded attorneys' fees under the catalyst theory. The court found that a CLRA notice letter (see Civ. Code § 1782) satisfied the pre-litigation demand requirement of Graham v. DaimlerChrysler Corp., 34 Cal.4th 553 (2004). Thanks to the blog reader who emailed me this order.

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8345172b069e200e39826bd1b8833

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference New federal decision re catalyst theory: Trew v. Volvo Cars of N. Am., Inc.:

Comments

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Working...
Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been posted. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.

Working...

Post a comment

Research


California Law Blogs