|
P0792 REVIEW GRANTED A school that was not a party to promissory notes signed by students when receiving government loans is not entitled to enforce an arbitration agreement they contained in the absence of evidence that it was an intended third party beneficiary; an action under the Unfair Competition Law asserted by plaintiffs who did not allege damage should be dismissed, but plaintiffs who did allege damage should be given an opportunity to amend and attempt to assert a class action.CitationTHORNTON v CAREER TRAINING CTR (Student Loan Notes) 128 CA4 116 [See: B&PC 17200 etseq; Bivens v Corel 126 CA4 1392, P/AT 3/05; Lytwyn v Fry's 126 CA4 1455, P/AT 3/05; Cheng-Canindin v Renaissance 50 CA4 676, T/AT 12/96; Auto Equity Sales v Superior Court 57 C2 450]
|
|
