|
2691 REVIEW DENIED Claims that a car rental company's refueling charge was exorbitant did not justify an action for unfair competition, but claims that indecipherable language in the rental agreement had the effect of misleading customers about the refueling charge did justify such a claim.CitationSCHNALL v HERTZ (Exhorbitant Prices) 78 CA4 1144 [See: B&PC 17200 etseq; CivC 1936; Podolsky v First Healthcare 50 CA4 632; State Farm v Superior Court 45 CA4 1093, at 6/96; Cel-Tech v LA Cellular 20 C4 163, T/AT 5/99]
|
|
