CONTACT ME


  • Kimberly A. Kralowec
    Kralowec Law, P.C.
    44 Montgomery Street,
    Suite 1210
    San Francisco, CA 94104
    Tel: (415) 546-6800
    Fax: (415) 546-6801
    Email: uclpractitioner@gmail.com

May 2018

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    

« UCL insurance opinion: The Traveler's Property Cas. Co. v. Actavis, Inc. | Main | New class certification opinion: Hefczyc v. Rady Children's Hospital-San Diego »

Tuesday, November 28, 2017

Comments

David Cooper

An important feature of this decision is that it contradicts and resolves the dicta in Benson v. Southern California Auto Sales (2015) 239 Cal.App.4th 1198, 1209-1210, which supported the notion that damages sought in other causes of action are likewise barred if a CLRA correction offer is not accepted. The rule is now the opposite.

The comments to this entry are closed.

2018 Supreme Court Calendar


Research


Disclaimer


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


  • The UCL Practitioner
    © 2003-2018
    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