33 results for 'cat:"Consumer Law" AND cat:"Jurisdiction"'.
J. Copenhaver denies the homeowner's motion to remand back to Kanawha County Circuit Court her suit seeking to halt the non-judicial foreclosure of her South Charleston home by the deed holder and the substitute trustee. The homeowner's attempt at remand by filing an amended complaint removing a claim under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act is futile since the court's original jurisdiction was fixed once the deed holder filed its notice for removal, and judicial economy is best served by the court retaining supplemental jurisdiction on her state law claims.
Court: USDC Southern District of West Virginia, Judge: Copenhaver, Filed On: April 18, 2024, Case #: 2:24cv103, NOS: Consumer Credit - Other Suits, Categories: consumer Law, Housing, jurisdiction
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. King finds the lower court improperly dismissed the wrongful death claim. The mother and the flooring company, accused of selling laminated floors that emitted illegal and unsafe levels of formaldehyde, entered into a settlement in regard to her consumer protection claim but not her wrongful death claim. Vacated.
Court: 4th Circuit, Judge: King, Filed On: January 17, 2024, Case #: 22-1643, Categories: consumer Law, jurisdiction, Wrongful Death
J. Oliver grants the debt collector's motion for summary judgment, ruling that while the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act allows claims related to rental properties, the renter's sole federal claim is not viable because he did not make any payments based on the allegedly misleading collection notices; therefore, this court lacks jurisdiction over the case.
Court: USDC Connecticut, Judge: Oliver, Filed On: January 2, 2024, Case #: 3:19cv1191, NOS: Consumer Credit - Other Suits, Categories: Debt Collection, consumer Law, jurisdiction
J. Rao upholds the district court's decision to remand the District of Columbia's case against several energy companies to superior court. The district, which accuses the companies of misrepresenting their products' effects on climate change, relied on D.C.'s consumer protection statute, rather than a federal cause of action. Affirmed.
Court: DC Court of Appeals, Judge: Rao, Filed On: December 19, 2023, Case #: 22-7163, Categories: Environment, consumer Law, jurisdiction
J. Lin remands to superior court the state's complaint accusing O'Reilly Auto of not only routinely denying its employees' requests for pregnancy accommodations, but actively retaliating against those that who make the requests. The state presents ample evidence that its claim under the Washington Law Against Discrimination will affect employees on a state level, and the state pleads its Washington Consumer Protection Act in good faith by including examples of other lawsuits where the Attorney General pleaded CPA violations in the context of employment.
Court: USDC Western District of Washington, Judge: Lin, Filed On: December 7, 2023, Case #: 2:23cv1370, NOS: Employment - Civil Rights, Categories: consumer Law, jurisdiction, Employment Discrimination
J. Lindsay remands a consumer's action against a reporting company that allegedly included a false criminal conviction on his credit report. The district court lacks jurisdiction, as the amount in controversy is less than $75,000.
Court: USDC Northern District of Texas , Judge: Lindsay, Filed On: December 1, 2023, Case #: 3:23cv683, NOS: Consumer Credit - Other Suits, Categories: Damages, consumer Law, jurisdiction
J. Durkin mostly grants a group of bike manufacturers’ motions to dismiss a product liability suit. A consumer brought the suit after her bike’s front wheel fell off as she was riding, causing her to fall and sustain injuries to her hands, head and wrists. The court finds it lacks jurisdiction over several of the companies involved in the bike’s manufacture, and dismisses the claims against them pending an amended complaint from the consumer which addresses jurisdiction specifically.
Court: USDC Northern District of Illinois, Judge: Durkin, Filed On: November 27, 2023, Case #: 1:23cv1328, NOS: Other Personal Injury - Torts - Personal Injury, Categories: consumer Law, Product Liability, jurisdiction
J. Boyle grants the customer of a women’s clothing company his motion to remand a case in which he and a class of customers sued the company for including 10 of the 16 digits on their credit card on their receipts, in violation of a credit transaction law. The company removed the suit to federal court, claiming that because the customers suffered injuries, the case must be tried there. However, the customers have not yet suffered concrete injuries because their credit information was not compromised despite the potential. Therefore, the lead customer is correct to request remand because the federal court does not have subject matter jurisdiction.
Court: USDC Eastern District of North Carolina, Judge: Boyle, Filed On: October 23, 2023, Case #: 5:23cv261, NOS: Consumer Credit - Other Suits, Categories: consumer Law, jurisdiction
J. White finds that a misleading marketing class action against Arizona Beverages must remain in California, even as the popular drink company seeks judgment on similar claims in a Missouri court. While both cases’ allegations and legal theories are essentially the same, there are no pending claims for relief on behalf of California consumers in the Missouri litigation. Because Arizona has already filed a motion for judgment in the Missouri case, it is unlikely that an additional amendment to expand claims on behalf of the putative “Nationwide Class” is forthcoming.
Court: USDC Northern District of California, Judge: White, Filed On: October 13, 2023, Case #: 4:22cv9108, NOS: Other Fraud - Torts - Personal Property, Categories: consumer Law, jurisdiction
J. Mays grants the defendant company's dismissal motion in this lawsuit brought by an individual under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act. The individual plaintiff fails to establish standing, as she has not shown that she suffered an emotional injury or that the company "made a definite promise of a payment plan and violated that promise." Accordingly, the complaint is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction, though the individual plaintiff is granted leave to amend.
Court: USDC Western District of Tennessee , Judge: Mays, Filed On: September 7, 2023, Case #: 2:22cv2656, NOS: Consumer Credit - Other Suits, Categories: Debt Collection, consumer Law, jurisdiction
J. Sweazea grants the out-of-state advertising companies' motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction, ruling the consumer's failure to provide more than speculation as to whether the companies sent unsolicited text messages about male enhancement drugs prevents him from establishing the business contacts in New Mexico to enforce the long-arm statute. Meanwhile, the New Mexico-based defendant's motion to dismiss will also be granted. Although it operates the website linked in the text messages, there is no evidence it sent the text messages or hired someone to do so.
Court: USDC New Mexico, Judge: Sweazea, Filed On: August 30, 2023, Case #: 2:22cv828, NOS: Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA) - Other Suits, Categories: consumer Law, jurisdiction
J. Stras finds a lower court improperly denied a class of consumers' motion to remand antitrust and unjust enrichment claims back to state court. The class argued that a dog food manufacturer falsely labeled its expensive product as a "prescription." However, state court is the proper venue based on lack of federal jurisdiction. Reversed.
Court: 8th Circuit, Judge: Stras, Filed On: July 31, 2023, Case #: 22-1796, Categories: consumer Law, jurisdiction, Class Action