Tag Archives: consumer protection

Can bait & switch cause actionable harm even though the consumer knows the price at checkout?

Veera v. Banana Republic, LLC, — Cal.Rptr.3d —-, 2016 WL 7242539, No. B270796 (Ct. App. Dec. 15, 2016) This decision, over a dissent, finds standing under the usual California statutory claims to challenge an alleged bait-and-switch scheme by Banana Republic, … Continue reading →

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

Initial interest false advertising (aka bait and switch) in Google ads

Beacon Plumbing & Mechanical Inc. v. Sposari Inc., 2016 WL 5795282, No. C15-1613 (W.D. Wash. Mar. 17, 2016) Beacon sued defendants, including Sposari, which does buisiness as Mr. Rooter Plumbing Services, for trademark infringement and dilution (federal claim dismissed) and … Continue reading →

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

Celebrity spokesperson isn’t directly liable under California consumer protection law

Luman v. Theismann, 647 Fed.Appx. 804 (9th Cir. 2016) Plaintiffs sued NAC Marketing Company and Joe Theismann for their advertising statements about NAC’s Super Beta Prostate product, bringing warranty claims as well as the usual California statutory claims.  Because one … Continue reading →

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

No duty to disclose child labor production in California, court rules

Hodsdon v. Mars, Inc., 162 F.Supp.3d 1016  (N.D. Cal. 2016) Mars sells chocolate, some of which comes from cocoa beans from Côte d’Ivoire, where trafficked children and forced laborers “wield dangerous tools, transport heavy loads, and face exposure to toxic … Continue reading →

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

Inconceivable: allegedly made-up price comparison allows consumer suit

Chester v. TJX Cos., 2016 WL 4414768, No 5:15-cv-01437 (C.D. Cal. Aug. 18, 2016) When an opinion begins with the quote, “You keep using that word. I don’t think it means what you think it means,” it’s not going to … Continue reading →

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

IPSC First Plenary Session

Scarcity of Attention in a World without IP Jake Linford We impose artificial scarcity so authors can pick up sunk costs. But costs of creation have fallen; perhaps © should be narrowed as a result.  Wrinkle: attention scarcity. Cheaper dissemination … Continue reading →

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Notre Dame Deception Roundtable, part 4

Session 4 – Contracts and Securities Discussion Leaders: Greg Klass, Ann Lipton, Andrea Matwyshyn   Matwyshyn: there’s a duty to perform in good faith in the US, but no duty to negotiate in good faith. If you have an integration … Continue reading →

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , | Leave a comment

Cal. court sensibly rejects Fourth Circuit’s GNC rule on consumer protection claims

Mullins v. Premier Nutrition Corp., 2016 WL 1534784, No. 13-cv-01271 (N.D. Cal. Apr. 15, 2016) This case revisits an issue with which courts have struggled: when consumer plaintiffs plead that a product advertised as clinically proven isn’t, is that a … Continue reading →

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

If only the last Trump would sound: Trump University case continues

Makaeff v. Trump University, LLC, 2015 WL 7302728, No. 10cv0940 (S.D. Cal. Nov. 18, 2015)   Charlatan and budding fascist Donald Trump failed to get rid of many consumer protection claims against him and his “Trump University” (now renamed).  Can’t … Continue reading →

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

Instant lack of gratification: coffee class certified

Suchanek v. Sturm Foods, Inc., 2015 WL 6689359, No. 11-CV-565 (S.D. Ill. Nov. 3, 2015)   After the district court’s initial dismissal of this class action case was resoundingly reversed, the case returned and was here certified by a new … Continue reading →

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment