Princess Cruise Lines, Ltd. v. Superior Court

Good Law
101 Cal. Rptr. 3d 323·179 Cal. App. 4th 36·2009 Cal. App. LEXIS 1809
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaNovember 10, 2009B212761California4,031 words

Opinion

Opinion

Flier, J.

The plaintiffs, real parties in interest in the proceedings before us, H. Roger Wang and Vivine Wang (from time to time collectively referred to as the Wangs), sued petitioner Princess Cruise Lines, Ltd., over charges added to the price of shore excursions taken during a cruise conducted by petitioner. The Wangs asserted five causes of action. The first three were based on Business and Professions Code sections 17200 (first cause of action) and 17500 (second) and on Civil Code section 1750 et seq. (third). Respectively, these statutes are California’s unfair competition law (UCL), false advertising law (FAL) and Consumers Legal Remedies Act (CLRA; Civ. Code, § 1750 et seq.). The fourth and fifth causes of action were based respectively on common law fraud and negligent misrepresentation.

Petitioner moved for summary judgment and summary adjudication. The trial court granted summary adjudication on the fourth and fifth causes of action because the Wangs could not show they relied on petitioner’s alleged misrepresentations. The trial court, however, denied the motion for summary judgment because it concluded that on the UCL, FAL and CLRA causes of action the Wangs did not…

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.