California Court of Appeal

Reset A A Font size: Print

Morgan v. AT&T Wireless Servs., Inc., B206788

In a consumer class action against defendant AT&T Wireless Services (AT&T) based on its marketing and sale of premium cell phones that operated on a wireless network that AT&T allegedly modified in a manner that rendered those premium cell phones essentially useless, trial court's ruling against plaintiffs is affirmed in part and reversed in part where: 1) trial court erred by sustaining AT&T's demurrer to plaintiffs' cause of action as there are sufficient facts alleged to show both a violation of the Unfair Competition Law (UCL) and plaintiffs have standing to bring this claim; 2) trial court did not err by sustaining the demurrer to the False Advertising Law (FAL) cause of action as plaintiffs failed to establish that they lost money or property as a result of AT&T's offer; 3) trial court erred by sustaining the demurrer for failure to comply the Consumers Legal Remedies Act (CLRA) notice requirements; and 4) plaintiffs alleged their fraud claim with sufficient specificity.

Appellate Information

  • Decided 09/23/2009
  • Published 09/23/2009

Judges

  • WILLHITE, Acting P.J.

Court

  • California Court of Appeal

Counsel

  • For Appellant:
  • Kirtland & Packard and Robert K. Friedl, El Segundo, for Plaintiffs and Appellants.

  • For Appellees:
  • Eagan O'Malley & Avenatti, John C. O'Malley, Newport Beach; Call, Jensen & Ferrell and Lisa A. Wegner, Newport Beach, for Defendant and Respondent.
Copied to clipboard