"OC Files Suit Against Toyota," Daily Journal, Mar. 15, 2010 ("Kimberly A. Kralowec, a San Francisco lawyer and blogger on 17200 litigation, said such arrangements with outside counsel 'may be the only way public prosecutors' offices can handle some of the cases they should be bringing.'")
"S.F. Lawyer Sets Up Own Shop," Daily Journal, Mar. 8, 2010 ("Kimberly Kralowec left San Francisco plaintiffs' law firm Schubert Jonckheer Kolbe & Kralowec to hang out her own shingle as The Kralowec Law Group. She handles plaintiff-side class actions, including lawsuits filed under California's unfair competition law.")
"Lower Courts Chip at Tobacco Ruling," Daily Journal, Jan. 19, 2010 ("'This trend, if it continues, will roll back the law to certainly pre-Tobacco II days and even pre-Mervyn's days,' said San Francisco attorney Kimberly Kralowec. She was referring to the court's first crack at Prop. 64, when it proclaimed that the measure did not make substantive changes to consumer protection law. Californians for Disability Rights v. Mervyn's, (2006) 39 Cal.4th 223.")
"Court Applies Tobacco II: Prop 64 Changed Standing Requirements, Not Substantive Law," BNA Class Action Litigation Report, Oct. 9, 2009 ("Kimberly A. Kralowec ... told BNA that [Morgan v. AT&T Wireless] was the most significant case to date to interpret the Tobacco II holdings. She said that while the Morgan decision does not contain new holdings, it serves to illustrate and confirm the holdings in Tobacco II.")
"Class Action Appellate Report," Forum, May/June 2009 ("As CAOC Board member Kimberly Kralowec noted on her blog, The UCL Practitioner, 'The bargain was for a product Made in the U.S.A. The plaintiffs were induced to make a purchase and did not get what they paid for, not by any stretch. That is why misrepresentations about geographic origin are prohibited in the first place.'")
"California Family Fitness sued over women-only areas," Sacramento Business Journal, May 1, 2009 ("People would not tolerate men-only clubs, and it took many years and efforts by women to stop discrimination against women, Kralowec said. 'It’s the same situation.'")
"Justices Restrict Fine-Print Lawsuits," The Daily Journal, Jan. 30, 2009 ("[O]ther plaintiffs' attorneys said they worry that the ruling will discourage people from bringing legitimate lawsuits. 'I think it's a significant problem when companies insert unconscionable provisions into their contracts and apparently no one can sue to stop them from doing that,' said Kimberly A. Kralowec of Schubert Jonckheer Kolbe & Kralowec in San Francisco.")
"Does 'Satisfaction Guaranteed' Actually Mean Anything? Yes, or your money back!" Slate, Dec. 19, 2008
"Farmers Insurance Fends Off $115 Million Verdict, For Now," The Daily Journal, Dec. 11, 2008 ("San Francisco attorney Kimberly A. Kralowec, who blogs on California's unfair competition law, said this may be the first opinion to specifically require 'causation' as an element of standing.")
"California Supreme Court to Take Up Meal and Rest Break Case," The Daily Journal, Oct. 23, 2008 ("'I'm very pleased and particularly glad that the Court of Appeal opinion is no longer a citable precedent in California courts,' said Kimberly Ann Kralowec of Schubert Jonckheer Kolbe & Kralowec in San Francisco, who argued on behalf of the workers.")
"Supremes Take 'Brinker' Break Case," The Recorder, Oct. 23, 2008 ("Kimberly Kralowec, a partner with San Francisco's Schubert Jonckheer Kolbe & Kralowec and one of the attorneys representing workers who sued Brinker Restaurant Corp., was elated by the Supreme Court's decision. 'The primary meal period compliance question is an issue that has been raised and actively litigated in dozens of cases in state court and federal court,' she said Wednesday. 'The Brinker ruling created a split of authority. Now the Supreme Court will sort it out.'")
"Strong Female Voices in the Legal Blogosphere," Law.com, Oct. 6, 2008
"L.A. Targets Insurers With Unlikely Law," The Daily Journal, Aug. 13, 2008 ("Legal observers said that Delgadillo has wielded those unusual powers in an unprecedented manner compared with district attorneys and other city prosecutors. 'I think it is significant. I haven't seen other city attorneys using this tool in what appears to be such a concerted and organized effort against an industry,' said Kimberly Kralowec, a partner with Schubert, Jonckheer, Kolbe & Kralowec in San Francisco. 'It reminds me more about what you might see the state attorney general doing,' Kralowec, who edits a blog devoted to Unfair Competition Law, said.")
"Panel Rejects Class Status for Meal Breaks," The Daily Journal, July 23, 2008 ("But Kimberly A. Kralowec, a partner in the San Francisco law firm of Schubert Jonckheer Kolbe & Kralowec, who represented the workers, downplayed the precedential nature of the ruling. She said appeals court[s] have split on the issue and it would have to be resolved by the state Supreme Court. She called the ruling 'a disaster for California employees.'")
"Workers Can't Catch a Break from Calif. Court," The Recorder, July 23, 2008 (“Kimberly Kralowec, a partner with San Francisco's Schubert Jonckheer Kolbe & Kralowec who handled part of the case against the Brinker Restaurant Corp., called the ruling 'a horrible decision for employees.' 'It will mean that workers are going to be much less likely to get their meal breaks,' she said, adding that she and co-counsel plan to seek review by the California Supreme Court.")
“Lawyer Sues Google Over Ad Placement,” The Recorder, July 18, 2008 (“If Kralowec's name sounds familiar, it may be because she is the longtime author of two legal blogs, The UCL Practitioner, a blog about unfair competition law and class actions in California, and The Appellate Practitioner, a blog about appellate practice in California and the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.”) (reprinted from Legal Blog Watch)
“Google Sued for Selling Ads on Parked Domains,” InformationWeek, July 15, 2008 (“In seeking class certification for the lawsuit, Levitte’s attorneys hope to represent other aggrieved Google advertisers. ‘We believe it’s a problem that affects all [Google’s] advertisers equally,’ said Kimberly Kralowec, partner at the law firm representing Levitte.”)
“Livin' la vida blawga and staying within ethical bounds,” Plaintiff Magazine (July 2008) (“Kimberly A. Kralowec, a partner in the San Francisco firm of Schubert Jonckheer Kolbe & Kralowec and a longtime legal blogger, [says,] ‘Regardless of what you say in your blog, no attorney-client relationship is created under the California rules of ethics.’”)
“Big Tech for Small Firms,” California Lawyer (July 2008) (“If you have a very specific area of interest in law, one that can help make your firm stand out from the crowd, a well-written blog can be a provocative attention getter and a potential rainmaker. One example of a well-done blog is The UCL Practitioner, written by San Francisco class action attorney Kimberly A. Kralowec. It has a very tight focus — California's Unfair Competition Law — and is updated frequently.”)
“The Search for Intelligent Life in the Blogosphere,” California Lawyer (May 2008) (“For instance, if Williams needs an update on developments in California's Unfair Competition Law (Bus. & Prof. Code §§ 17200-17209), he goes straight to The UCL Practitioner (www.uclpractitioner.com). ‘I look there if I need to know the latest in the law,’ Williams says of the blog written by Kimberly A. Kralowec, a partner at Schubert & Reed in San Francisco. ‘I can count on Kimberly for that.’”)
“Debate Heats Up Over Unpublished Opinions,” California Lawyer (May 2008) (“Kimberly Kralowec, an appeals attorney at San Francisco's Schubert & Reed, agrees that a change would mean extra work for lawyers. But she also finds some truth to the claim that the state Supreme Court is much less likely to grant review of unpublished decisions. ‘I can hear the frustration that is coming through in [the Hild] complaint,’ says Kralowec, who blogs at The Appellate Practitioner. ‘Whether it rises to a constitutional violation is a different story.’”)
“$15.6M Awarded In San Francisco Newspaper Clash,” Competition Law 360, March 6, 2008 (“Kimberly A. Kralowec, a partner at Schubert & Reed LLP in San Francisco, said the jury's finding that the Weekly violated California's Unfair Practices Act could be a predicate for a finding by the judge that the defendant also violated the ‘unlawful’ prong of the state's Unfair Competition Law. ‘Indeed, I would expect that such a finding would be virtually compelled by the jury's verdict,’ Kralowec said.”)
“Schubert & Reed Gains Class-Action Attorney,” The Daily Journal, January 14, 2008 (“Kimberly A. Kralowec, a plaintiffs' class-action attorney formerly with the Furth Firm in San Francisco for six years, begins at San Francisco's Schubert & Reed at the end of January.”)
“S.F. Firm Gets First Lateral,” The Recorder, January 11, 2008 (“Kralowec was ready to open her own firm, but when a friend connected her with Schubert & Reed, she saw a fit. On Jan. 28 she’ll join the small San Francisco plaintiff shop, established in 1996, as its first-ever lateral partner.”)
“Leveling the Playing Field,” The Daily Journal, May 4, 2007 (“Based on the rapid appearance of conflicting analyses, the Supreme Court decision in Pioneer Electronics likely will have significant consequences in class actions. See, e.g., … Kimberly Kralowec, ‘Thoughts on the Class-Action Aspects of Pioneer Electronics,’ UCL Practitioner, Jan. 25, 2007.”)
“Class-Action Dissonance,” The Daily Journal, March 5, 2007 (“Kimberly A. Kralowec, in her excellent Web log, The UCL Practitioner (www.uclpractitioner.com), heralded Pioneer Electronics as a pro-class-action decision.”)
“Language on Form Spares Lawyer $500,000,” The Daily Journal, February 16, 2007 (“Rava was represented in the sanctions matter by … Section 17200 expert Kimberly A. Kralowec of San Francisco.”)
“Case of the tour-bus kickbacks: bellhops win big settlement,” San Francisco Bay Guardian, January 3, 2007 (“‘How the case was litigated after we filed suit was certainly interesting,’ Kimberly Kralowec, the plaintiffs’ lawyer, told us.”)
“Tour bus companies settle price-fixing suit,” San Francisco Chronicle, August 30, 2006 (“The settlement, to be reviewed today by San Francisco Superior Court Judge Richard Kramer, would benefit about 1,000 people, plaintiffs’ lawyer Kimberly Kralowec said.”)
“Ruling Renders Prop. 64 Retroactive,” The Recorder, July 25, 2006 (“Kimberly Kralowec, of counsel in The Furth Firm in San Francisco and a recognized expert on Prop 64, called [Mervyn's] a ‘measured decision’ that ‘reached a middle ground.’”)
“Ruling Threatens Consumer Lawsuits,” Los Angeles Times, July 25, 2006 (“Kimberly Kralowec, a San Francisco attorney who handles unfair-competition cases and maintains the blog http://www.uclpractitioner.com, said she was ‘relieved that the broad liability rules seem to be preserved [by the Mervyn’s decision].’ ”)
“Class Actions Hamstrung in Prop 64 Cases,” The Recorder, July 12, 2006 (“Kimberly Kralowec, an of counsel at The Furth Firm in San Francisco who maintains a blog on Prop 64, called the issues addressed in Tuesday’s [Pfizer] ruling the ‘three big ones,’ and believes there’s a chance the opinion could even influence the high court’s thinking on retroactivity.”)
“UCL Suits to Target Illegal Hiring,” The Recorder, July 7, 2006 (“UCL expert Kimberly Kralowec … suggested in an email that … ‘a narrowly-tailored action … might be the best approach.’ ”)
“State's High Court to Untangle Voter-Modified Unfair Competition Law,” San Diego Daily Transcript, Oct. 21, 2005 (“‘The general rule is new legislation applies prospectively only unless there is a clear indication otherwise,’ said Kimberly Kralowec of San Francisco’s Furth Firm[, who] has a blog devoted to the ongoing debate.”)
“Supreme Court Will Decide Prop. 64 Retroactivity,” The Daily Journal, April 28, 2005 (“It was a foregone conclusion that the Supreme Court would resolve the issue, said Kimberly A. Kralowec, a plaintiffs’ lawyer with the Furth Firm who writes a Web log about Proposition 64 and retroactivity. …. ‘It was obvious we needed guidance from the Supreme Court,’ she said. Kralowec added that it is important to resolve the issue as early as possible. ‘If they had waited, these cases would be in limbo longer, and parties would be litigating without knowing if they are litigating on behalf of the general public or not,’ she said.”)
“State High Court to Review Cases in Prop. 64 Flap,” The Recorder, April 28, 2005 (“Kimberly Kralowec, a plaintiff lawyer with the Furth Firm in San Francisco who maintains the 17200blog.com Web site – a de facto clearing house for information on Prop 64 – pointed out Wednesday that the Supreme Court could first decide the question in a separate case that’s been lingering there since 2003.”)
“Clarification" re "Defense Firms Hail Prop. 64,” National Law Journal, February 7, 2005 (“A story on Page 27 of the Dec. 20-27 edition of The National Law Journal, entitled ‘Defense firms hail Prop. 64,’ should have credited a Web log, The UCL Practitioner, http://17200blog.blogspot.com, edited by Kimberly A. Kralowec, with providing some background information for the article, including the approximate number of California firms that sent ‘client alert’ messages.”)
“1st District Rejects Retroactive Use of Initiative on Tort Reform,” The Daily Journal, February 3, 2005 (“The appeals court most likely to address the issue in the immediate future is the 4th District Court of Appeal, which heard oral argument on Proposition 64 in a pair of cases in January, said Kimberly Kralowec, a plaintiffs’ lawyer who writes a Web log about Proposition 64 and retroactivity issues. ... . Plaintiffs’ lawyers cited an advantage to having the first opinion on the subject go their way. ‘On a short-term basis, there’s a huge benefit for plaintiffs,’ Kralowec said. ‘It provides ammunition and clout for plaintiffs in other pending appeals.’”)
“First District Rules Prop 64 Not Retroactive,” The Recorder, February 2, 2005 ("'This [decision] is a victory all around for the plaintiff bar. It's very strongly worded,' said Kimberly Kralowec, a plaintiff lawyer with the Furth Firm whose 17200 Web log has become a popular source of information on retroactivity arguments.")
“Prop 64, In Reverse,” The Recorder, January 24, 2005 ("[W]hen Proposition 64 — which limits the reach of Business & Professional Code § 17200 — passed on Election Day, Kralowec's blog, www.17200blog.com, leaped into the spotlight. The blog and Kralowec, of counsel at The Furth Firm, have quickly become a leading resource in answering Prop 64's $64,000 question: whether the statute is retroactive.")
“Blogging the Law,” Sacramento Bee, January 3, 2005 ("[W]ho knew that a statute of California law ... would be ripe for the blogosphere? Kimberly Kralowec, a San Francisco-based class-action attorney, set up a blog in 2003 that focuses on the state's Unfair Competition Law.... Since [Proposition 64's] passage, the blog (www.17200blog.com) has served as a clearinghouse for California lawyers tracking how Proposition 64 affects cases that predated the initiative.")
“Judge Denies Retroactivity of Proposition 64,” The Daily Journal, January 3, 2005 (“Kramer’s ruling is among more than a dozen superior court decisions that have been issued on the retroactivity issue so far from around the state, according to an online compendium of the cases at www.17200blog.com.”)
“Courts Will Play Role in Effort to Stem Abuse of 17200 Law,” Los Angeles Business Journal, November 29, 2004 ("Kralowec and others believe that the law was used properly, except by a handful of attorneys who abused it. But those abusive cases became notorious ....")
Robert Carlin, "Chapter 17: Giving San Francisco a Leg to Stand On in UCL Actions," 39 McGeorge L. Rev. 392, 393 n.14 (2008)
Nicole Ochi, "Are Consumer Class and Mass Actions Dead? Complex Litigation Strategies after CAFA and MMTJA," 41 Loy. L. A. L. Rev. 965, 980 n.108 (Spring 2008)
William R. Shafton, "California's Uncommon Common Law Class Action Litigation," 41 Loy. L. A. L. Rev. 783, 837 n.387, 844 n.431 (Spring 2008)
Saby Ghoshray, "Using Unfair Competition Law to Deter Undocumented Immigration: Examining the Broader Implications of Recent California Litigation," 29 Campbell L. Rev. 233, 236 n.12, 239-40 n.28, 240 n.32, 251 n.69 (Winter 2007)
J. Robert Brown, "Blogs, Law School Rankings, and TheRacetotheBottom.org," University of Denver Sturm College of Law, Legal Studies Research Paper No. 07-33, at p. 34 n.284 (July 26, 2007) (available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1003425)
Timothy Sandefur, “The Information Age, Again,” 11 Nexus J. Op. 5, 8-9 (2006)
Bonny E. Sweeney, “Proposition 64 Does Not Apply to Pending Cases,” 14 Competition 11 (2005)
