Kowalsky v. Hewlett-Packard Co.

How courts have described this case

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

• applying pleading standard of Rule 9(b) to UCL and CLRA claims based on misrepresentations and non-disclosures, but applying Rule 8 to allegations regarding defendant's knowledge of a defect
• holding UCL unlawful prong dependent upon plaintiff's CLRA claim
• “California courts have also suggested that while claims of common law fraud 21 require a deception ‘known to be false by the perpetrator,’ this element is not required to state a 22 claim under the fraudulent prong of the UCL.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).