The California Supreme Court will hear arguments Tuesday morning in the In re Tobacco II Cases, S147345 (George, C.J., not participating; Moore, J., assigned justice pro tempore) #06-120 In re Tobacco II Cases, S147345. (D046435; 142 Cal.App.4th 891; Superior Court of San Diego County; JCCP 4042.) The statement of issues doesn't seem likely to reach any issues directly pertinent to wage and hour litigation, but many wage and hour lawyers handle other kinds of unfair competition cases, so like many of you, we are watching the progress of this case:
Petition for review after the Court of Appeal affirmed orders decertifying a class in a civil action. This case includes the following issues: (1) In order to bring a class action under Unfair Competition Law (Bus. & Prof. Code, § 17200 et seq.), as amended by Proposition 64 (Gen. Elec. (Nov. 2, 2004)), must every member of the proposed class have suffered “injury in fact,” or is it sufficient that the class representative comply with that requirement? (2) In a class action based on a manufacturer’s alleged misrepresentation of a product, must every member of the class have actually relied on the manufacturer’s representations?
If any readers are attending and want to send us your notes from the argument, we would be happy to pass them along to the rest.
Comments