Legal Opinion
BROCKET v. Moore
California Court of Appeal
Decided February 20, 2003No. C038317PublishedCited by 64 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
MORRISON, J.
In adopting the Unlawful Detainer Assistants Act (Bus. & Prof. Code, § 6400 et seq., UDAA) the Legislature found in part that “there currently exist numerous unscrupulous individuals . . . who purport to offer protection to tenants from eviction. The[y] . . . represent themselves as legitimate tenants’ rights associations, legal consultants, professional legal assistants, paralegals, attorneys, or typing services. . . . The acts of these unscrupulous individuals ... are particularly despicable in that they target low-income and non-English-speaking Californians as victims…
2Cases cited26 opinions
- Bank of the West v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1992
- Foreman & Clark Corp. v. FallonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1971
- Committee on Children's Television, Inc. v. General Foods Corp.California Supreme Court · 1983
- Federal Trade Commission v. Colgate-Palmolive Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1965
- Cortez v. Purolator Air Filtration Products Co.California Supreme Court · 2000
21 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by64 opinions
- In Re Tobacco II CasesCalifornia Supreme Court · 2009
- Williams v. Gerber Products Co.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2008
- Clemens v. DaimlerChrysler Corp.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2008
- Colgan v. Leatherman Tool Group, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 2006
- Consumer Advocates v. Echostar Satellite Corp.California Court of Appeal · 2003
59 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.