Discovery
Civ-Pro
Case Summary |
|
2966 REVIEW DENIED A federal statute that prohibits state regulation of cellular phone rates does not pre-empt an action for false advertising against a cellular service provider.CitationSPIELHOTZ v SUPERIOR COURT (Dead Zones) 86 CA4 1366 [See: 47 USC 332(c)(3)(A); LA Cellular v Superior Court 65 CA4 1013, T/AT 9/98; SD v Garmon 359 US 236; Medtronic v Lohr 518 US 470; Ball v GTE 81 CA4 529, T/AT 7/00; Geier v American Honda 529 US 861, T/AT 7/00] |
|
|
|||||
|
|||||
Finz Case Law Summaries (Finz Advance Tapes)
|
|||||
Copyright by Pincus Legal Education, Inc. ©1992 - 2022
|
|||||