Skip to main content
Please enter a legal issue and/or a location
Begin typing to search, use arrow keys to navigate, use enter to select

Find a Lawyer

More Options

Morgan v. AT&T Wireless Servs., Inc., No. B206788

By FindLaw Staff on September 24, 2009 | Last updated on March 21, 2019

In a consumer class action against defendant AT&T Wireless Services (AT&T) based on its marketing and sale of premium cell phones that operated on a wireless network that AT&T allegedly modified in a manner that rendered those premium cell phones essentially useless, trial court's ruling against plaintiffs is affirmed in part and reversed in part where: 1) trial court erred by sustaining AT&T's demurrer to plaintiffs' cause of action as there are sufficient facts alleged to show both a violation of the Unfair Competition Law (UCL) and plaintiffs have standing to bring this claim; 2) trial court did not err by sustaining the demurrer to the False Advertising Law (FAL) cause of action as plaintiffs failed to establish that they lost money or property as a result of AT&T's offer; 3) trial court erred by sustaining the demurrer for failure to comply the Consumers Legal Remedies Act (CLRA) notice requirements; and 4) plaintiffs alleged their fraud claim with sufficient specificity. 

Read Morgan v. AT&T Wireless Servs., Inc., No. B206788

Appellate Information

Filed September 23, 2009


Opinion by Judge Willhite


For Appellant: Kirtland & Packard and Robert K. Friedl

For Appelle:  Eagan O'Malley & Avenatti, John C. O'Malley, Call, Jensen & Ferrell and Lisa A. Wegner

You Don’t Have To Solve This on Your Own – Get a Lawyer’s Help

Meeting with a lawyer can help you understand your options and how to best protect your rights. Visit our attorney directory to find a lawyer near you who can help.

Or contact an attorney near you:
Copied to clipboard