597 results for 'cat:"Consumer Law"'.
J. Cole denies motions to dismiss and strike allegations outlined in the second amended complaint of a cellular telephone customer who claims the telephone company made unwanted sales calls to her phone in violation of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act. The telephone company’s motion to dismiss brought arguments that had already been reviewed by the court, and the judge denies the motion as a request for reconsideration because it does not present new evidence or show a change in law or error in the prior decision. Although several of customer’s allegations in the second pleading involve internet job postings raising concerns about hearsay, the customer’s claims do not centrally rely on these postings. The judge finds the new evidence relevant as presented and denies the motion to strike allegations.
Court: USDC Southern District of Ohio, Judge: Cole, Filed On: March 22, 2024, Case #: 1:22cv152, NOS: Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA) - Other Suits, Categories: Communications, consumer Law
J. Schofield partially denies the insurer's motion to dismiss a class action challenge to its policy of reducing the value of vehicles totaled in a car wreck and therefore paying less on insurance claims for those vehicles. A reasonable jury could find that the insurer engaged in misleading practice regarding the calculation of the value of accident victims' cars, but the complaint's claims based on alleged violations of Regulation 64 rest on an incorrect reading of the law.
Court: USDC Southern District of New York, Judge: Schofield, Filed On: March 22, 2024, Case #: 1:21cv6243, NOS: Other Contract - Contract, Categories: Insurance, consumer Law, Class Action
Want access to unlimited case records and advanced research tools? Create your free CasePortal account now. No credit card required to register.
Try CasePortal for Free
J. Alston grants the creditors' motions to dismiss. The homeowners claim the creditors fabricated evidence, notices, and other documents when initiating foreclosure on their home. The homeowner argues that the underlying debt was discharged in their 2008 Chapter 7 bankruptcy proceeding and that the bankruptcy discharge constitutes a permanent statutory injunction prohibiting creditors from taking any action to collect on the debt. The homeowners do not allege facts sufficient to demonstrate that the creditors fall under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act's definition of a debt collector.
Court: USDC Eastern District of Virginia, Judge: Alston, Filed On: March 20, 2024, Case #: 1:23cv736, NOS: Other Contract - Contract, Categories: Bankruptcy, consumer Law, Banking / Lending
J. Zilly denies the debt collector's motion to dismiss the Washington Consumer Protection Act and Washington Collection Agency Act claims in the lease holder's complaint alleging that the debt collector and its employee tried to report a $33,500 debt that the lease holder did not owe for allegedly breaking an apartment lease. The Washington Supreme Court held that a CPA can proceed with an out-of-state plaintiff like the leaseholder if the defendant engaged "in unfair or deceptive acts that directly or indirectly affect the people of Washington," which applies in this case because the debt collector does business in Washington and affects people in Washington.
Court: USDC Western District of Washington, Judge: Zilly, Filed On: March 19, 2024, Case #: 2:22cv1791, NOS: Consumer Credit - Other Suits, Categories: Debt Collection, consumer Law
J. Poplin partially grants the business defendants' motion to compel discovery in this lawsuit brought by timeshare developers asserting claims under the Lanham Act and the Tennessee Consumer Protection Act, based on the defendants' alleged efforts to disrupt their valid timeshare contracts. The timeshare plaintiffs are required to respond to certain requests, including requests for documents related to "bad debt" and "exit fees" stemming from timeshare cancellations.
Court: USDC Eastern District of Tennessee , Judge: Poplin, Filed On: March 18, 2024, Case #: 3:20cv251, NOS: Other Statutory Actions - Other Suits, Categories: consumer Law, Interference With Contract, Discovery
J. Massing vacates summary judgment in favor of a hotel being sued by children’s clothing sellers who were told to leave the hotel after they arrived to conduct business with retailers, were told by the hotel that there was an unwritten policy against conducting business at the hotel and then they argued against the imposition of this new unwritten policy that they hadn't been told about previously. While the hotel didn’t violate a consumer protection statute, the hotel arguably referenced a “fictitious policy” as a “deceptive means of forcing them out.” Reversed.
Court: Massachusetts Supreme Court, Judge: Massing, Filed On: March 18, 2024, Case #: 23-P-178, Categories: Commerce, consumer Law, Business Practices
J. Shea denies the credit agencies' motion to dismiss, ruling that even though the borrower's settlement and revocation of acceptance with the car dealer do not objectively show a transfer of the debt, the "60 days late" statements on the borrower's credit report are objectively inaccurate and give him standing to pursue Fair Credit Reporting Act claims.
Court: USDC Connecticut, Judge: Shea, Filed On: March 18, 2024, Case #: 3:23cv518, NOS: Consumer Credit - Other Suits, Categories: Evidence, consumer Law
J. Martinez mostly declines to dismiss the consumers' complaint alleging that Amazon overcharged them by claiming that it sold them digital content when Amazon was actually only licensing the digital content. The consumers have sufficiently alleged that they were injured by overpaying for a purchase they would not have paid for if they knew they were only purchasing a limited license. Furthermore, Amazon's use of the word "buy" regarding the digital content could be materially misleading to a reasonable consumer.
Court: USDC Western District of Washington, Judge: Martinez, Filed On: March 15, 2024, Case #: 2:22cv401, NOS: All Other Real Property - Real Property, Categories: Fraud, consumer Law, Contract
J. Wolford dismisses a complaint alleging that CVS's hand sanitizer falsely claims to kill 99.99% of germs. It would not be reasonable for a consumer to expect the hand sanitizer to kill disease-causing germs not frequently found on hands. Furthermore, the back label of the product "makes clear that the product kills 'more than 99.99% of many common germs that cause illness,'" not all disease-causing germs.
Court: USDC Western District of New York, Judge: Wolford , Filed On: March 15, 2024, Case #: 6:22cv6227, NOS: Other Fraud - Torts - Personal Property, Categories: Fraud, consumer Law, False Advertising
J. Buchanan finds that the trial court properly denied a car manufacturer's motion to compel arbitration of a car buyer's lemon law claim. The manufacturer was not a party to the sales contract between the dealer and buyer containing the arbitration clause, so it cannot compel arbitration on the basis of collateral estoppel. And the dealership's provision of the manufacturer's warranty as part of the sale did not automatically incorporate the warranty into the sales contract between the dealer and buyer. Affirmed.
Court: California Courts Of Appeal, Judge: Buchanan, Filed On: March 15, 2024, Case #: D083006, Categories: Arbitration, consumer Law, Warranty
J. Clark denies the car buyer's motion to certify a class of buyer's allegedly misled by the insurer about damages to their cars. The insurer obtained a clean title for the car after it had been involved in an accident and sold for salvage. It was then resold to the buyer, who was unaware of its accident history. However, purchase of a mistitled vehicle does not, by itself, prove reliance. Therefore, individual questions of reliance predominate because they rely upon the circumstantial evidence of each purchase.
Court: USDC Eastern District of Missouri, Judge: Clark, Filed On: March 14, 2024, Case #: 4:22cv385, NOS: Other Fraud - Torts - Personal Property, Categories: Fraud, consumer Law, Class Action
J. Carr denies the newspapers' motion to dismiss, ruling their disclosure of subscribers' personal information to Meta whenever they interacted with a video on the newspapers' websites constitutes a concrete injury and gives the subscribers standing to pursue claims under the Video Privacy Protection Act. Meanwhile, the subscribers are considered consumers under the Act because the purpose of their accounts and submission of personal data is to access the newspapers' main business, the distribution of news, including the videos, which are not ancillary services.
Court: USDC Northern District of Ohio, Judge: Carr, Filed On: March 13, 2024, Case #: 3:23cv302, NOS: Other Statutory Actions - Other Suits, Categories: consumer Law, Privacy, Class Action
J. Zilly awards the consumer $3,900 in damages for his purchase of the ASC service contract and $182 for the Gateway Auto Repair emissions repairs for the consumer's lawsuit accusing the car dealer of selling vehicles with illegally altered emission controls. The consumer proves that he suffered both an “injury” and actual damages under the Consumer Protection Act because the car dealer did not disclose that the vehicle had a tampered turbocharger, tampered airbox and lacked VECI sticker constitute.
Court: USDC Western District of Washington, Judge: Zilly, Filed On: March 13, 2024, Case #: 2:20cv1616, NOS: Other Contract - Contract, Categories: Damages, consumer Law, Contract
J. Fashing grants Wells Fargo's motion to compel arbitration, ruling the arbitration clause in the child support recipients' contract for a debit card is enforceable and requires their claims regarding unauthorized withdrawals to be settled via arbitration. However, the administrator of the support payment debit cards is not entitled to compel arbitration because the agreement on specifies the bank and excludes any other parties; therefore, the claims against the administrator will proceed.
Court: USDC New Mexico, Judge: Fashing, Filed On: March 12, 2024, Case #: 1:23cv202, NOS: Other Statutory Actions - Other Suits, Categories: Arbitration, consumer Law, Class Action