Class Action

Oral argument preview: Meyer v. Sprint Spectrum

By Kimberly A. Kralowec

This morning at 9:00 a.m., the Supreme Court will hear oral argument in Los Angeles in an important CLRA case, Meyer v. Sprint Spectrum, no. S153846. These are the issues on review in Meyer:

(1) Has a person suffered "damage" within the meaning of the Consumer Legal Remedies Act (Civil Code, section 1780, subd. (a)), such as to allow that person to bring an action under the Act if that person is a party to an agreement containing an unconscionable term (see Civil Code, section 1770, subd. (a)(19)), even though no effort has been made to enforce the unconscionable term? (2) Did plaintiffs have standing to seek declaratory relief?

The Court of Appeal said "no" to both questions. Meyer v. Sprint Spectrum L.P., 150 Cal.App.4th 1136 (2007) (review granted). See these two blog posts for more on the Court of Appeal's opinion.

An intrepid roving reporter is attending the argument on my behalf, and I hope to be able to put up an argument summary tomorrow or Friday.  Meanwhile, here are some of the briefs from the case.  Many thanks to the several people who helped me obtain copies of these: 

• Opening Brief on the Merits (filed 11/13/07)
• Answer Brief on the Merits (filed 12/12/07)
• Reply Brief on the Merits (filed 01/04/08)
• Amicus Curiae Brief of National Consumer Law Center (filed 02/15/08)
• Amicus Curiae Brief of U.S. Chamber of Commerce (filed 02/15/08)
• Answer to Chamber of Commerce Amicus Brief (filed 02/26/08)
• Answer to NACA Amicus Brief (filed 03/06/08)

Full post as published by The UCL Practitioner on December 03, 2008 (boomark / email).