Originally Posted by
dgcpaphd
Hello Bear96:
I am puzzled by your post.
Are you saying that you disagree with the judge who made the decision to deny UA's Motion to Dismiss?
The judge took many factors into account INCLUDING that screen shot of the promise by UA for lifetime upgrades at the end of every year.
Please clarify - Thanks
-
You (and many others here) are seriously misunderstanding what this ruling was about. It was not a ruling on the substantive merits of the case. It was only saying that *IF* what the plaintiffs are alleging is true, there may have been a breach of contract. That is all. It did not remotely even touch on the issue of whether what the plaintiffs are alleging is true or not.