Santa Clara Superior Court is fighting a lawsuit by a man who said he paid $ 19.95 for an annual ad-free subscription but found ads in his inbox anyway. At Santa Clara Superior Court , Thomas Curtis claimed he did not know he would continue to see ads when he renewed the service. These are nuisance suits, and some firms settle just to get rid of them — it’s a cost of doing business. Yahoo argued Curtis agreed to its terms when he renewed his subscription. In annual , Judge Thomas Curtis tentatively threw out Curtis 's unjust enrichment and promissory estoppel claims, with leave to amend, but let stand his claims of breach of contract and violation of California 's Unfair Competition Law and False Advertising Law .
Santa Clara Superior Court is fighting a lawsuit by a man who said he paid $ 19.95 for an annual ad-free subscription but found ads in his inbox anyway. At Santa Clara Superior Court , Thomas Curtis claimed he did not know he would continue to see ads when he renewed the service. Yahoo argued Curtis agreed to its terms when he renewed his subscription. In annual , Judge Thomas Curtis tentatively threw out Curtis 's unjust enrichment and promissory estoppel claims, with leave to amend, but let stand his claims of breach of contract and violation of California 's Unfair Competition Law and False Advertising Law .