Cal.Rptr.2d 358] (claim based on tobacco company’s “Joe Camel” advertising cam- paign that allegedly improperly targeted minors); telecommunications, Day v. AT&T (1998) 63 Cal.App.4th 325 [74 Cal.Rptr.2d 55] (claim for injunctive relief arising out of misleading advertis- ing in sale of prepaid phone cards); • Nursing homes, Podolsky v. First Healthcare Corp. (1996) 50 Cal.App.4th 632 [58 Cal.Rptr.2d 89] (claims based on deceptive practices relating to nursing home admission agreements and guaran- tees executed by relatives); • Investments and banking, Hitz v. First Interstate Bank (1995) 38 Cal.App.4th 274 [44 Cal.Rptr.2d 890] (claims by credit card holders for bank’s alleged improper assessment of late and over limit fees), Dean Witter Reynolds, Inc. v. Superior Court (1989) 211 Cal.App.3d 758 [259 Cal.Rptr. 789] (challenge to $50 termina- tion fee for individual retirement accounts) and Fenning v. Glenfed, Inc. (1996) 40 Cal.App.4th 1285 [47 Cal.Rptr.2d 715] (securities fraud claims against bank and securities brokerage subsidiary); • Title insurance, Quelimane Company, Inc. v. Stewart Title Guaranty Co. (1998)19 Cal.4th 26 [77 Cal.Rptr.2d 709] (claim for unlawful refusal to issue title insur- ance polices on tax sale properties); • Environmental issues, Hewlett v. Squaw Valley Corp. (1997) 54 Cal.App.4th 499 [63 Cal.Rptr.2d 118] (claims for alleged improper tree removal by a ski resort); • Employment and labor, Hudgins v. Neiman Marcus Group, Inc. (1995) 34 Cal.App.4th 1109 [41 Cal.Rptr.2d 46] (claim for improper deductions from employee wages for commissions paid for items later returned). But the UCL’s utility in attacking
unlawful and unfair practices was signifi- cantly diminished after the turn of the century.
WORKPLACE RIGHTS
NO RECOVERY = NO FEE Call for FREE consultation
Generous referral fees paid per State Bar rules 310-273-3180
9255 Sunset Blvd., #411, Los Angeles, CA 90069
www.californialaborlawattorney.com
Unpaid Overtime Wrongful Termination Discrimination Wage & Hour Class Actions Harassment Retaliation Disability Pregnancy Leave
JANUARY 2012 The Advocate Magazine — 75
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95 |
Page 96