By Brian Wolfman
Way back on September 15, I blogged here about an effort by Public Citizen and the Center for Auto Safety to convince the California Supreme Court to review a ruling that, if allowed to stand, would gut California's consumer protection laws. The California Court of Appeal had ruled that California's Proposition 64 requires consumers to show "reliance" to prevail under those laws. (As you may recall, Proposition 64 got rid of the so-called private attorney general provisions of California's consumer protection laws.) Then, here, I blogged again after the California Supreme Court granted review.
With the able representation of California consumer lawyer Jeff Fazio, Public Citizen and the Center for Auto safety have now filed their amicus brief on the merits. Because a fundamental premise of modern consumer protection law has been that the plaintiff need not prove reliance, the California Supreme Court's decision in this case is likely to be very important.
Comments