Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Institution
- Keyword
-
- AB 168 (4)
- AB 1382 (3)
- AB 1893 (3)
- SB 961 (3)
- AB 1555 (2)
-
- CPSC (2)
- Consumer (2)
- Helmets (2)
- Market share liability (2)
- 1990) (1)
- AB 1827 (1)
- Acceptance and refund (1)
- Advertising (1)
- Alternative liability (1)
- Arbitration (1)
- Bad faith (1)
- Breach of warranty (1)
- CPA (1)
- Collateral estoppel effect (1)
- Concussion (1)
- Congress (1)
- Constitution (1)
- Constitutionally guaranteed (1)
- Consumer protection act (1)
- Consumers (1)
- Court of Appeals (1)
- Defective product (1)
- Dissent (1)
- Environmentalism (1)
- Equitable (1)
Articles 61 - 65 of 65
Full-Text Articles in Law
Dewey V. R. J. Reynolds Tobacco Company: A Change In Cigarette Labels In New Jersey, Donna M. Dever
Dewey V. R. J. Reynolds Tobacco Company: A Change In Cigarette Labels In New Jersey, Donna M. Dever
Villanova Law Review
No abstract provided.
Recent Legislative Activity, Stephen Kirkwood
Recent Legislative Activity, Stephen Kirkwood
Loyola Consumer Law Review
No abstract provided.
Underinsured Motorists Provisions Do Not Cover Accident Victims Whose Household Membership Is Not Readily Apparent, Clarinda Gipson
Underinsured Motorists Provisions Do Not Cover Accident Victims Whose Household Membership Is Not Readily Apparent, Clarinda Gipson
Loyola Consumer Law Review
No abstract provided.
The Need For Revisiting The Imposition Of Bad Faith Liability: Industrial Indemnity Co. V. Kallevig, J. Benson Porter, Jr.
The Need For Revisiting The Imposition Of Bad Faith Liability: Industrial Indemnity Co. V. Kallevig, J. Benson Porter, Jr.
Seattle University Law Review
This Note posits two recommendations. First, in order to harmonize the bad faith standards applied in Kallevig and Gingrich, the Kallevig reasonable justification standard should be applied in situations involving questions similar to those confronted by the Gingrich court. Second, this Note contends that the Kallevig court's analysis imposing liability under the CPA was defective because it failed to take proper account of the frequency requirement within the unfair trade practices regulations. By ignoring the frequency provision, the Kallevig decision allows inconsistent treatment of similar factual situations depending on whether the decision is being made by an agency or …