Fairbanks v. Superior Court (S157001)
When I wrote about this decision I praised it for its thoroughness. It was an issue of first impression but I found the Court of Appeal's four-part statutory interpretation very persuasive. I predicted that the Court of Appeal had resolved forever the question of whether insurance is covered by the Consumer Legal Remedies Act (CLRA). I was wrong.
On Nov. 14, the Supreme Court granted review on that very question.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment