1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. Cal.App.4th
  4. 209 Cal.App.4th
  5. 209 Cal.App.4th 758 (2012)
 

PHILLIPS v. SPRINT PCS

No. A134371.

209 Cal.App.4th 758 (2012)

147 Cal. Rptr. 3d 274

TIMOTHY PHILLIPS et al., Plaintiffs and Appellants, v. SPRINT PCS et al., Defendants and Respondents.

Court of Appeals of California, First District, Division Three.

September 26, 2012.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Franklin & Franklin, J. David Franklin ; and Anthony A. Ferrigno for Plaintiffs and Appellants.

Shook, Hardy & Bacon, Tammy B. Webb , Matthew J. Vanis ; Kelley Drye & Warren and Joseph A. Boyle for Defendants and Respondents.

OPINION

POLLAK, J. —

In a consumer class action alleging misrepresentation of cellular telephone rates, the trial court in 2006 denied defendants' motion to compel arbitration based upon a finding that the provisions in the underlying customer contracts requiring bilateral arbitration and waiver of a class action are unconscionable under California law. Years later, after the United States Supreme Court abrogated the California rule and...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases