Schnall v. Hertz Corporation

How courts have described this case

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

• finding that disclaimers do not give notice to the reasonable consumer when they are incomprehensible and needlessly complex
• holding, where plaintiff based § 17200 claim on challenge to reasonableness of refueling fee imposed by rental car agency, statute that allowed rental agencies to impose refueling fee and did not specify limit of fee acted as “safe harbor” against plaintiffs claim
• “[A]ny claims of unfairness under the UCL should be defined in connection with a legislatively declared policy . 27 . . . ”
• “[A]ny claims of unfairness under the UCL should be defined in connection with a legislatively declared policy . 27 . . . ”
• Cel-Tech holding that “any claims of unfairness under the UCL should be defined in connection with a legislatively declared policy” also applied to UCL actions brought by consumers
• Cel-Tech 17 holding that “any claims of unfairness under the UCL should be defined in connection 18 with a legislatively declared policy” also applied to UCL actions brought by consumers

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).