Legal Opinion
Schnall v. Hertz Corporation
California Court of Appeal
Decided March 7, 2000No. A083939PublishedCited by 85 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
KLINE, P. J.
Appellant Peter Schnall filed this class action 1 complaint seeking damages and injunctive relief against respondent Hertz Corporation (Hertz). His chief allegation was that, because Hertz’s fuel service charge was “excessive and punitive,” the rental agreement was unlawful, unfair and fraudulent within the meaning of the unfair competition law (Bus. & Prof. Code, § 17200) (hereafter the UCL) and an unconscionable contract of adhesion that was void as a matter of law. He alleged as well that, apart from the amount of the fuel service charge, provisions of the rental…
2Cases cited40 opinions
- Cel-Tech Communications, Inc. v. Los Angeles Cellular Telephone Co.California Supreme Court · 1999
- Gruenberg v. Aetna InsuranceCalifornia Supreme Court · 1973
- Federal Trade Commission v. Sperry & Hutchinson Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1972
- Ora Lee Williams v. Walker-Thomas Furniture Company, William Thorne v. Walker-Thomas Furniture CompanyCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1965
- Committee on Children's Television, Inc. v. General Foods Corp.California Supreme Court · 1983
35 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by85 opinions
- Lozano v. AT & T Wireless Services, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2007
- Lavie v. Procter & Gamble Co.California Court of Appeal · 2003
- America Online, Inc. v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2001
- Bardin v. DaimlerChrysler Corp.California Court of Appeal · 2006
- Klein v. Chevron U.S.A., Inc.California Court of Appeal · 2012
80 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.