News & Analysis as of

Appeals › False Advertising › California

Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP

Navigating Ambiguity in Consumer Protection Law: Insights from Bodenburg v. Apple

Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP on

Plaintiff Lisa Bodenburg brought a putative class action against Defendant Apple Inc. after purchasing a 200 GB iCloud+ storage plan. She believed that by upgrading to the paid 200 GB plan, the 200 GB would add to the free 5...more

Foley & Lardner LLP

Even When Civil Penalties Are Sought, Unfair Competition and False Advertising Claims Remain Equitable and Will Not Be Tried by a...

Foley & Lardner LLP on

The California Supreme Court recently held that claims brought by the government for civil penalties under California’s unfair competition law (B&PC § 17200, et seq.) and false advertising law (B&PC § 17500, et seq.) are to...more

Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP

California: No Jury Trials in Unfair Competition Law and False Advertising Law Cases (and Proposition 65 Cases?)

Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP on

The California Supreme Court held there is no statutory or constitutional right to a jury trial in actions brought under the Unfair Competition Law (UCL) and False Advertising Law (FAL). Its reasoning and basis likely...more

3 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 1

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
Sign up Log in
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
- hide
- hide