Eckert

Eckert v. BAY AREA CELLULAR TELEPHONE CO.

Good Law
102 Cal. Rptr. 2d 880·85 Cal. App. 4th 1369
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMay 16, 2001A085000California4,093 words

Opinion

Opinion

This appeal arises from litigation centering on defendant's alleged practice of failing to disclose discounted wireless telephone rates for customers with impaired hearing. A demurrer without leave to amend was sustained by the trial court on the ground it lacked subject matter jurisdiction over the cause. We agree the threshold jurisdictional question is dispositive and affirm.

The controlling issue may be framed as follows. In a suit under the unfair competition law (UCL) (Bus. & Prof.Code, § 17200 et seq.) based on the Public Utilities Commission's (PUC) authority to regulate disclosures by wireless telecommunications providers to consumers regarding services and rates, how far must the commission have proceeded to exercise its regulatory powers over the subject matter of the lawsuit before jurisdiction to award relief is preempted by section 1759 of the Public Utilities Code? [1] , [2] Plaintiffs tell us that lower courts lack jurisdiction to hear cases such as this one only where the effect of the litigation would actually interfere with an existing PUC policy. And, plaintiffs argue, because the commission has not yet proceeded to exercise its regulatory…

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.