Greenlining Institute v. Public Utilities Commission

Good Law
103 Cal. App. 4th 1324·127 Cal. Rptr. 2d 736·2002 Cal. App. LEXIS 5066·2002 Daily Journal DAR 13518
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaNovember 27, 2002A098037California3,719 words

Opinion

Opinion

Parrilli, J.

This petition for writ of review arises out of proceedings brought before the Public Utilities Commission (PUC) by several consumer groups and individual consumers against Pacific Bell Telephone Company (Pacific), alleging that Pacific engaged in deceptive marketing of its optional telephone services. The PUC determined that certain of Pacific’s practices were unlawful and ordered prospective and retrospective relief.

The Greenlining Institute, the Latino Issues Forum, and 17 individuals identified as California residents and customers of Pacific (collectively Greenlining) seek review of the PUC’s decision not to adjudicate Greenlining’s claims that Pacific’s conduct violated the Unfair Practices Act (Bus. & Prof. Code, § 17200 et seq.) and the False Advertising Act (§ 17500 et seq.), together, the unfair competition law (UCL). We conclude Greenlining’s arguments lack merit.

Ordinarily, we would issue a summary denial of a petition found to lack merit. However, we take the somewhat unusual step of writing to express our reasoning for denying Greenlining’s petition because of the importance of the legal issue presented.

I. Factual and Procedural History

In 1998, the…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.