AKKERMAN v. MECTA CORP., INC.

No. B192109.

62 Cal.Rptr.3d 39 (2007)

152 Cal.App.4th 1094

Atze AKKERMAN, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. MECTA CORPORATION, INC., Defendant and Respondent.

Court of Appeal of California, Second District, Division Six.

June 27, 2007.


Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Moxon & Kobrin and Kendrick Moxon, Los Angeles, for Plaintiff and Appellant.

Lewis Brisbois Bisgaard & Smith, Gary M. Lape, Costa Mesa, and Joseph C. Owens, Los Angeles, for Defendant and Respondent.


OPINION ON REHEARING

GILBERT, P.J.

The homonym "suit" can mean a legal action or apparel. Though quite dissimilar, the two share one important attribute in class actions. One size does not fit all.

Plaintiff Atze Akkerman appeals an order denying his motion for class certification. He filed an action under the Unfair Competition Law (UCL) (Bus. & Prof. Code §§ 17200, 17500)1 for deceptive advertising against...

NEVER MISS A DECISION. START YOUR SUBSCRIPTION.

Uncompromising quality. Enduring impact.
Your support ensures a bright future for independent legal reporting.

As you are aware we have offered this as a free subscription over the past years and we have now made it a paid service.Look forward to your continued patronage.

GET STARTED


OR

Read it with your Leagle account.
Sign in to continue


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