Cellphone Termination Fee Cases CA1/5
Opinion
Opinion
Bruiniers, J.
I. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
We set out the facts and procedural history of this case in some detail in Ayyad v. Sprint Spectrum, L.P. (2012) 210 Cal.App.4th 851 (Ayyad) and Cellphone Termination Fee Cases (2011) 193 Cal.App.4th 298. We refer the reader to those opinions for a full description of the underlying facts and limit our statement here to only those matters relevant to the current issues. A. Brief History of the Litigation This case was initially filed in July 2003 against Sprint and other providers of cellular telephone service. The operative third consolidated amended complaint was filed as “a class action . . . by current and/or former customers of wireless telephone services.” The complaint alleged that “plaintiffs and the members of the class are individual consumers who either are or, during the period extending from four years prior to the filing of this action to the present, were subscribers to [Sprint’s] wireless telephone service agreements that include an [ETF] provision . . . .” Based on a number of statutory and common law theories, plaintiffs claimed Sprint charged them unlawful ETF’s for cancelling their cellular customer service…