Harris v. Time, Inc.
California Court of Appeal
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
KING, J.
In this action where plaintiffs suffered no damage or loss other than having been enticed by the external wording of a piece of bulk rate mail to open the envelope, believing that doing so would result in the receipt of a free plastic calculator watch, we hold that the maxim “the law disregards trifles” applies and dismissal of the action was proper on this ground.
Mark Harris, Joshua Gnaizda and Richard Baker appeal from a judgment of dismissal of this class action lawsuit arising from their receipt of a direct mail advertisement from Time, Inc. They contend the court erred…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Schumm v. BergCalifornia Supreme Court · 1951
- Lefkowitz v. Great Minneapolis Surplus Store, Inc.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1957
- Cobb v. Pacific Mutual Life InsuranceCalifornia Supreme Court · 1935
- Minor v. MinorCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1960
- Diamond v. University of Southern CaliforniaCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1970
3Cited by16 opinions
- Lueras v. BAC Home Loans Servicing, LPCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2013
- Donovan v. RRL Corp.California Supreme Court · 2001
- Amanda Sateriale v. R J Reynolds Tobacco CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2012
- Troester v. Starbucks CorporationCalifornia Supreme Court · 2018
- Izadi v. MacHado (Gus) Ford, Inc.District Court of Appeal of Florida · 1989
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.