Consumer Defense Group v. Rental Housing Industry Members
California Court of Appeal
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
SILLS, P. J.—
I. INTRODUCTION
A prerequisite for the private enforcement by way of litigation of the warning provisions of Proposition 65 is a 60-day notice from the would-be private enforcer to the alleged violator and to relevant prosecutorial authorities—particularly the Attorney General’s office—sufficient to give the alleged violator and the appropriate governmental authorities opportunity to both undertake a meaningful investigation and instigate remedial action prior to the filing of litigation. (Yeroushalmi v. Miramar Sheraton (2001) 88 Cal.App.4th 738, 740 [106 Cal.Rptr.2d 332]…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Serrano v. PriestCalifornia Supreme Court · 1977
- People v. PietersCalifornia Supreme Court · 1991
- Wershba v. Apple Computer, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 2001
- Friends of the Earth v. Consolidated Rail Corp.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1985
- Consumer Cause, Inc. v. SmilecareCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2001
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by16 opinions
- Angelucci v. Century Supper ClubCalifornia Supreme Court · 2007
- Sciortino v. Pepsico, Inc.District Court, N.D. California · 2015
- Starbucks Corp. v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2008
- Consumer Advocacy Group, Inc. v. Kintetsu Enterprises of AmericaCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2006
- Angelucci v. Century Supper ClubCalifornia Supreme Court · 2007
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.