Weinstat v. Dentsply Int'l Inc., No. A116248

By FindLaw Staff on January 08, 2010 | Last updated on March 21, 2019

In plaintiffs' class action lawsuit against a manufacturer of certain device used by dentists under the unfair competition law (UCL) and for breach of express warranty, trial court's order decertifying the class of dentists is reversed where: 1) Tobacco II has dispatched the incorrect reasoning of the trial court that, under Proposition 64, each class member must establish standing, thereby requiring the court to delve into individual proof of material, reliance and resulting damage; 2) the order decertifying the class as to the breach of express warranty claims was improper because it was rendered in the absence of new law or evidence, and substantively, and the order was contrary to law because it improperly grafted an element of prior reliance onto the express warranty claims and this error infected the entire ruling as to those claims.  

Read Weinstat v. Dentsply Int'l Inc., No. A116248 [HTML]

Read Weinstat v. Dentsply Int'l Inc., No. A116248 [PDF]

Appellate Information

Filed January 7, 2010


Opinion by Judge Reardon

For Appellant:   Duane Morris, Bullivant Houser Bailey, Paul D. Nelson

For Appellee:   Horvitz & Levy, Lisa Perrochet, John A. Taylor, Jr., Shea Stokes Roberts & Wagner, Maria C. Roberts

Copied to clipboard