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

Princess Cruise Lines, Ltd. v. Sup. Ct., No. B212761

By FindLaw Staff on November 11, 2009 | Last updated on March 21, 2019

In plaintiffs' suit against the defendant-Cruise Line  brought under the California's Unfair Competition Law (UCL), the False Advertising Law (FAL), and the Consumer Legal Remedies Act (CLRA), over charges added to the price of shore excursions taken during a cruise, trial court's order denying defendant's motion for summary judgment is vacated and remanded where: 1) trial court erred in concluding that the CLRA cause of action was barred by Civil Code 1781(c); 2) a plaintiff asserting UCL, FAL and CLRA must show that he or she relied on the defendant's misrepresentations; 3) plaintiffs did not rely on any representations made by defendants; 4) there are no material questions of fact about the cost of excursions. 

Read Princess Cruise Lines, Ltd. v. Sup. Ct., No. B212761 [HTML]

Read Princess Cruise Lines, Ltd. v. Sup. Ct., No. B212761 [PDF]

Filed November 10, 2009


Opinion by Judge Flier


For Appellant:   Kaye, Rose & Partners, Bradley M. Rose, Carolyn J. Kaye, Aksana Moshaiv and André M. Picciurro

For Appellee:   Bailey Law Group, Mohammed K. Ghods and William A. Stahr

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