Legal Opinion

Fairbanks v. Superior Court of Los Angeles County

California Supreme Court

Decided April 20, 2009No. S157001PublishedCited by 54 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

KENNARD, J.

Enacted in 1970, the Consumers Legal Remedies Act (Civ. Code, § 1750 et seq.) prohibits specified unfair and deceptive acts and practices in a “transaction intended to result or which results in the sale or lease of goods or services to any consumer” (id., § 1770, subd. (a)). The question we decide here is whether life insurance is a “service” subject to the act’s remedial provisions. We conclude that it is not. As this is consistent with the Court of Appeal’s decision, we affirm its judgment.

I

In November 2003, plaintiff Pauline Fairbanks filed a complaint in superior court,…

2Cases cited22 opinions

  1. Egan v. Mutual of Omaha InsuranceCalifornia Supreme Court · 1979
  2. Moradi-Shalal v. Fireman's Fund Ins. CompaniesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1988
  3. Miklosy v. Regents of the University of CaliforniaCalifornia Supreme Court · 2008
  4. People v. KnollerCalifornia Supreme Court · 2007
  5. Cates Construction, Inc. v. Talbot PartnersCalifornia Supreme Court · 1999

17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by54 opinions

  1. Goodman v. LozanoCalifornia Supreme Court · 2010
  2. Barry v. State Bar of Cal.California Supreme Court · 2017
  3. Kaldenbach v. Mutual of Omaha Life InsuranceCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2009
  4. Gutierrez v. Carmax Auto Superstores Cal., California Court of Appeal, 5th District2018
  5. McHugh v. Protective Life Ins. Co.California Supreme Court · 2021

49 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API