• Enter your email address:

September 2020

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      

« Petition for rehearing filed in Tobacco | Main | Supreme Court grants review in Kwikset Corp. v. Superior Court »

Monday, June 08, 2009


Chris from L.A.

Although it does not cite or discuss Tobacco, today's opinion by the Ninth Circuit in Kearns v. Ford Motor Commpany is instructive. The case involved a class action against Ford under the UCL and CLRA based on claims that Ford misrepresented the safety and reliability of its Ford-certified vehicles. The district court dismissed the complaint for failure to allege fraud with specificity under F.R.C.P. 9(b). The Ninth Circuit affirmed. The Court rejected the argument that specificity in pleading was not required under state law on the ground that federal law governed the pleading standard.

This case suggests that federal courts may not follow the Cal Supreme Court's holding on the second issue in the Tobacco case, that under the UCL, the plaintiff need not allege what he/she relied upon with specificity.

The comments to this entry are closed.

2020 Supreme Court Calendar



  • 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
    © 2003-2020
    by Kimberly A. Kralowec
    All rights reserved.

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

  • StatCounter