Dunham v. Wainwright

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding § 1782(a) notice was not required where the “complaint sought only injunctive relief, restitution, and disgorgement, but not monetary damages”
• “Defendant is 20 correct that a breach of express warranty claim must describe the exact terms of the 21 warranty at issue.”
• “1782(d) allows a plaintiff to bring a CLRA action for injunctive relief without compliance with the notice provisions of subdivision (a).”
• “Product advertisements, brochures, or packaging can serve to create part of an express warranty. While this does not require that plaintiff relied on the individual advertisements, it does require that plaintiff was actually exposed to the advertising.”
• “Product advertisements, brochures, or packaging can serve to create part of an express warranty. While this does not require that plaintiff relied on the individual advertisements, it does require that plaintiff was actually exposed to the advertising.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).