Consumer Fraud Act violation in New Jersey

2001We held that in the context of a Consumer Fraud Act claim, "an ultimate outcome charge is necessary here to aid the jury in its fact-finding role." Id. at 165, 723 A. 2d 100 .

2001We held that in the context of a Consumer Fraud Act claim, "an ultimate outcome charge is necessary here to aid the jury in its fact-finding role." Id. at 165, 723 A. 2d 100 .

2010McDarby v. Merck, 401 N.J.Super. 10, 94-98 , 949 A.2d 223 (App.Div.2008), appeal dismissed, 200 N.J. 267 , 979 A.2d 766 (2009).

2010McDarby v. Merck, 401 N.J.Super. 10, 94-98 , 949 A.2d 223 (App.Div.2008), appeal dismissed, 200 N.J. 267 , 979 A.2d 766 (2009).

2010McDarby v. Merck, 401 N.J.Super. 10, 94-98 , 949 A.2d 223 (App.Div.2008), appeal dismissed, 200 N.J. 267 , 979 A.2d 766 (2009).

2010McDarby v. Merck, 401 N.J.Super. 10, 94-98 , 949 A.2d 223 (App.Div.2008), appeal dismissed, 200 N.J. 267 , 979 A.2d 766 (2009).

2010First Capital Corp., 346 N.J.Super. 42, 54-57 , 786 A. 2d 886 (App.Div.2001) (Consumer Fraud Act claim); Young v. Prudential Ins.

2010First Capital Corp., 346 N.J.Super. 42, 54-57 , 786 A. 2d 886 (App.Div.2001) (Consumer Fraud Act claim); Young v. Prudential Ins.

2006In support of its argument that a class action asserting a Consumer Fraud Act violation may be maintained only if the complaint alleges that not only the putative class representative but also all other class members suffered "ascertainable loss," U.S. Life relies upon Thiedemann v. Mercedes-Benz USA, 183 N.J. 234, 251-54 , 872 A. 2d 783 (2005); Weinberg, supra, 173 N.J. at 253-54 , 801 A. 2d 281 ; and N.J.

2006In support of its argument that a class action asserting a Consumer Fraud Act violation may be maintained only if the complaint alleges that not only the putative class representative but also all other class members suffered "ascertainable loss," U.S. Life relies upon Thiedemann v. Mercedes-Benz USA, 183 N.J. 234, 251-54 , 872 A. 2d 783 (2005); Weinberg, supra, 173 N.J. at 253-54 , 801 A. 2d 281 ; and N.J.

2006Citizen Action v. Schering-Plough Corp., 367 N.J.Super. 8, 16 , 842 A. 2d 174 (App. Div.), certif. denied, 178 N.J. 249 , 837 A. 2d 1092 (2003).

2006Citizen Action v. Schering-Plough Corp., 367 N.J.Super. 8, 16 , 842 A. 2d 174 (App. Div.), certif. denied, 178 N.J. 249 , 837 A. 2d 1092 (2003).

2006Consistent with this view of the legislative intent in authorizing private consumer fraud actions, the Court has indicated that "the class action rule should be construed liberally in a case involving allegations of consumer fraud." In re Cadillac, supra, *1110 93 N.J. at 435 , 461 A. 2d 736 ; see also Strawn v. Canuso, 140 N.J. 43, 68 , 657 A. 2d 420 (1995) ("[A] class action is the superior method for adjudication of consumer-fraud claims[.]"); Riley v. New Rapids Carpet Ctr., 61 N.J. 218, 226-28 , 294 A. 2d 7 (1972) ("[A] court should be slow to hold that a suit [under the Consumer Fraud Ac

2006Consistent with this view of the legislative intent in authorizing private consumer fraud actions, the Court has indicated that "the class action rule should be construed liberally in a case involving allegations of consumer fraud." In re Cadillac, supra, *1110 93 N.J. at 435 , 461 A. 2d 736 ; see also Strawn v. Canuso, 140 N.J. 43, 68 , 657 A. 2d 420 (1995) ("[A] class action is the superior method for adjudication of consumer-fraud claims[.]"); Riley v. New Rapids Carpet Ctr., 61 N.J. 218, 226-28 , 294 A. 2d 7 (1972) ("[A] court should be slow to hold that a suit [under the Consumer Fraud Ac

2006In support of its argument that a class action asserting a Consumer Fraud Act violation may be maintained only if the complaint alleges that not only the putative class representative but also all other class members suffered "ascertainable loss," U.S. Life relies upon Thiedemann v. Mercedes-Benz USA, 183 N.J. 234, 251-54 , 872 A. 2d 783 (2005); Weinberg, supra, 173 N.J. at 253-54 , 801 A. 2d 281 ; and N.J.

2006In support of its argument that a class action asserting a Consumer Fraud Act violation may be maintained only if the complaint alleges that not only the putative class representative but also all other class members suffered "ascertainable loss," U.S. Life relies upon Thiedemann v. Mercedes-Benz USA, 183 N.J. 234, 251-54 , 872 A. 2d 783 (2005); Weinberg, supra, 173 N.J. at 253-54 , 801 A. 2d 281 ; and N.J.

2003In Blatterfein , we affirmed a trial court ruling declining to dismiss a Consumer Fraud Act claim against an architect, observing that even if the "learned profession" bar against consumer fraud claims referred to in dictum in Neveroski v. Blair, 141 N.J.Super. 365, 379 , 358 A. 2d 473 (App.Div.1976), had any continuing validity, it could not be successfully asserted where the professional's conduct alleged as the basis of the claim implicated his commercial activity, such as the advertising of services, as distinguished from the rendition of the professional services themselves.

2003In Blatterfein , we affirmed a trial court ruling declining to dismiss a Consumer Fraud Act claim against an architect, observing that even if the "learned profession" bar against consumer fraud claims referred to in dictum in Neveroski v. Blair, 141 N.J.Super. 365, 379 , 358 A. 2d 473 (App.Div.1976), had any continuing validity, it could not be successfully asserted where the professional's conduct alleged as the basis of the claim implicated his commercial activity, such as the advertising of services, as distinguished from the rendition of the professional services themselves.

2003The New Jersey Supreme Court has concluded that the 1971 amendment to the Act permitting a private right of action imposes a higher standard of proof than that applicable to enforcement of proceedings brought by the state Attorney General, holding that [w]hile the Attorney General does not have to prove that the victim was damaged by the unlawful conduct, N.J.S.A. 56:8-2, a private plaintiff must show that he or she suffered "an ascertainable loss ... as a result of the unlawful conduct." Meshinsky v. Nichols Yacht Sales, Inc., supra., 110 N.J. at 473 , 541 A. 2d 1063 , (1988).

2003The New Jersey Supreme Court has concluded that the 1971 amendment to the Act permitting a private right of action imposes a higher standard of proof than that applicable to enforcement of proceedings brought by the state Attorney General, holding that [w]hile the Attorney General does not have to prove that the victim was damaged by the unlawful conduct, N.J.S.A. 56:8-2, a private plaintiff must show that he or she suffered "an ascertainable loss ... as a result of the unlawful conduct." Meshinsky v. Nichols Yacht Sales, Inc., supra., 110 N.J. at 473 , 541 A. 2d 1063 , (1988).

2003The allegations of the complaint, viewed with the requisite liberality and indulgence in favor of non-movants on motions addressed to the pleadings, see Printing Mart-Morristown, supra, 116 N.J. at 772 , 563 A. 2d 31 , assert a consumer fraud cause of action arising from the mere fact that plaintiffs were treated by Kellogg who, at the time, was not a fully licensed physician.

2003The allegations of the complaint, viewed with the requisite liberality and indulgence in favor of non-movants on motions addressed to the pleadings, see Printing Mart-Morristown, supra, 116 N.J. at 772 , 563 A. 2d 31 , assert a consumer fraud cause of action arising from the mere fact that plaintiffs were treated by Kellogg who, at the time, was not a fully licensed physician.

2002Silva v. Autos of Amboy, Inc., 267 N.J.Super. 546, 556 , 632 A. 2d 291 (App.Div.1993) (in awarding fee on successful Consumer Fraud Act claim, representing only one count of a seven count complaint, but all counts were interrelated factually and legally, trial court erred in awarding only one-seventh of the fee requested).

2002Silva v. Autos of Amboy, Inc., 267 N.J.Super. 546, 556 , 632 A. 2d 291 (App.Div.1993) (in awarding fee on successful Consumer Fraud Act claim, representing only one count of a seven count complaint, but all counts were interrelated factually and legally, trial court erred in awarding only one-seventh of the fee requested).