Lozano v. AT & T Wireless Services, Inc.

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 district court reasonably concluded that predominance was defeated when the standard for upholding a class action waiver differed from state to state
• holding that the plaintiff estab- lished an injury in fact where he did not receive the full num- ber of agreed-upon minutes he purchased in a wireless agreement
• holding that unfairness must be tied to a “legislatively declared” policy
• explaining that the statute is violated where a 14 defendant’s act or practice is (1) unlawful, (2) unfair, (3) fraudulent, or (4) in violation of 15 section 17500 (“FAL”)
• affirming that “individual circumstances ... would not destroy predominance” of common issues
• noting that the FTC 26 guidelines are more appropriate for anti-competitive conduct

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).