Skip to main content
· 6/10/1993

Friddle v. Epstein

Citations

  • 16 Cal. App. 4th 1649
  • 21 Cal. Rptr. 2d 85
  • 93 Daily Journal DAR 8824
  • 93 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 5259
  • 1993 Cal. App. LEXIS 738

How courts have described this case

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

  • holding that the right to recover statutory damages “accrue[s] at the moment the Privacy Act was violated”
  • focusing on whether evidence indicated parties desired confidentiality
  • focusing on whether evidence indicated parties desired confidentiality

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Poche

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.