Pacific Bell Wireless, LLC v. Public Utilities Commission

Good Law
140 Cal. App. 4th 718·2006 Cal. App. LEXIS 905·2006 Daily Journal DAR 7751·44 Cal. Rptr. 3d 733·2006 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 5399
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJune 20, 2006G034991California10,442 words

Opinion

Opinion

Fybel, J.

Introduction

After an investigation, a nine-day evidentiary hearing before an administrative law judge, and a review by the full California Public Utilities Commission of the State of California (the Commission), the Commission imposed a multimillion dollar fine against Pacific Bell Wireless, LLC, doing business as Cingular Wireless (Cingular) for two interrelated violations of law. First, the Commission found Cingular’s policy of charging its customers an early termination fee to cancel a wireless telephone service contract without permitting any type of grace period was an unjust and unreasonable practice, particularly when Cingular admitted the best way for customers to decide whether Cingular’s service would work for them was to try the service for some period of time. Second, the Commission found that Cingular failed to disclose to its customers known network problems and misled its customers regarding the wireless network’s coverage and service, which were also unjust and unreasonable practices. Cingular challenges the Commission’s decision and its later order modifying the decision and denying rehearing.

The issues raised by Cingular are whether the Commission…

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.