Vol. 21, Issue 2, 2012June 01, 2012 PDT
“REVISITING MATERIALITY” IS REVISIONIST HISTORY: AN EXPRESS WARRANTY DEFINES MATERIALITY UNDER THE UCL AND CLRA ABSENT AN UNREASONABLE SAFETY HAZARD
“REVISITING MATERIALITY” IS REVISIONIST HISTORY: AN EXPRESS WARRANTY DEFINES MATERIALITY UNDER THE UCL AND CLRA ABSENT AN UNREASONABLE SAFETY HAZARD
Paul J. Riehle, Jia-Ming Shang,
Articles in Vol. 21, Issue 2, 2012
Vol. 21, Issue 2, 2012
- TRIAL MANAGEMENT AFTER THERASENSE: INEQUITABLE CONDUCT, WALKER PROCESS FRAUD, AND THE SEVENTH AMENDMENTAsim M. BhansaliWilliam S. Hicks
- DUKES AND COMMON PROOF IN CALIFORNIA CLASS ACTIONSKimberly A. Kralowec
- “REVISITING MATERIALITY” IS REVISIONIST HISTORY: AN EXPRESS WARRANTY DEFINES MATERIALITY UNDER THE UCL AND CLRA ABSENT AN UNREASONABLE SAFETY HAZARDPaul J. RiehleJia-Ming Shang
- THE CALIFORNIA COURT OF APPEAL’S FLAGSHIP OPINION – A LIFELINE FOR ANTITRUST PLAINTIFFS OR A SINKING VESSEL?Eric P. Enson
Paul J. Riehle & Jia-Ming Shang, “REVISITING MATERIALITY” IS REVISIONIST HISTORY: AN EXPRESS WARRANTY DEFINES MATERIALITY UNDER THE UCL AND CLRA ABSENT AN UNREASONABLE SAFETY HAZARD, 21 Competition Journal (2012).