Agent Issues ASTA firm, Anolik file responses to Calif. suit June 05, 2002 Share 1 -- By Laura Del Rosso SAN FRANCISCO -- The law firm of McKenna and Cuneo of San Francisco filed a response in Superior Court in Sacramento on behalf of 74 ASTA agencies named in a lawsuit brought by Consumer Action League, which claims agencies violated the California Seller of Travel Law by failing to post registration numbers on their Web sites.The ASTA response contends that the league has no legal basis in filing the suit against the agencies and recovering any punitive damages as a result of the alleged misconduct."Given the scant nature of the 'injury' alleged, if any, ... the primary objective of the suit is to collect attorneys' fees," the response states."It is an abuse of the judicial process and a waste of resources for all concerned ... to sue over 250 companies in this beleaguered industry."Separately, the Alexander Anolik law firm in San Francisco filed a response in Superior Court in Sacramento on behalf of four agencies.The response also contends that the league has no legal basis to sue the agencies and that its main purpose is to collect attorneys' fees.Anolik's response also claims that the league is not entitled to bring suit to enforce the Seller of Travel law because the law itself is unconstitutional. The law violates the commerce clause of the U.S. Constitution because it interferes in interstate commerce, the response states.In April, Sacramento attorney Brian Kindsvater filed suit against 225 agencies with California locations on behalf of an entity called the Consumer Action League. However, Kindsvater, in an interview with Travel Weekly, said that the league does not exist as a "full-blown" organization and that the plaintiff is an individual, whom he would not name.He said he would drop the suit against agencies if they posted their registration numbers on Web sites and paid the league a settlement fee, which would be confidential.