December 2008

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
    © 2003-2008
    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

« "§17200 Practice - Life After Prop. 64" | Main | Supplemental letter briefs from In re Tobacco II Cases »

Friday, February 22, 2008

New UCL "injury in fact" decision: Animal Legal Defense Fund v. Mendes

In Animal Legal Defense Fund v. Mendes, ___ Cal.App.4th ___ (Feb. 15, 2008), the Court of Appeal (Fifth Appellate District) held that the plaintiffs—two consumers of dairy products—lacked standing to pursue a UCL claim against ranchers who allegedly confined dairy calves in isolation crates without an "adequate exercise area," in violation of Penal Code section 579t. The plaintiffs, the Court held, had not suffered "loss of money or property": "Here, the consumers had the benefit of their bargain—that is, they received dairy products that were not of inferior quality. Any injury they suffered upon learning 'the truth' about industrial dairy farming was not economic." Slip op. at 11.

The Court also held that the Penal Code provision that the defendants allegedly violated carries no private right of action. Id. at 4-9.

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/t/trackback/454579/26331084

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference New UCL "injury in fact" decision: Animal Legal Defense Fund v. Mendes:

Comments

Post a comment

If you have a TypeKey or TypePad account, please Sign In

CAOC CORNER

Research


California Law Blogs

More Law Blogs