consumer claim (Washington) · Go Syfert
← Washington issues

consumer claim in Washington

6 Washington opinions name it 2 courts 2007–2022 1 in the last five years

The cases below were cited by Washington courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.

Followed or applied (1)

CaseFollowedCited
Panag v. Farmers Insurancegreen
wash · 2009 · cited in 1 Washington opinions naming this issue, 2014–2014
1 sentence

2014Id. at 62 (‘Consulting an attorney to dispel uncertainty regarding the nature of an alleged debt is distinct from consulting an attorney to institute a CPA claim.

11

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

CaseNegativeCited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Washington. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Also cited on this issue (7)

CaseCitedYears
Karlin v. IVF America, Inc. green
ny · 1999
2 sentences

2013The fact that a person may have a claim for lack of informed consent “does not preclude a separate claim on the ground that deceptive acts or misleading advertising lured the person to the doctor’s office in the first plac e” Karlin, 712 N.E.2d at 667 .

2013Karlin, 712 N.E.2d at 668 .

22013–2013
Floeting v. Grp. Health Coop. green
wash · 2019
1 sentence

2022This case does not involve harassment by a coworker, and as previously observed, the Washington Supreme Court 21 No. 37889-6-III City of Prosser v. Teamsters Union Local 839 et al. has held that a claim by a plaintiff who is served rather than employed by the defendant “is more of a consumer claim than a claim between an employee and employer, and [such a] claim is not limited by the employment discrimination statute.” Floeting, 192 Wn.2d at 855 .

12022–2022
Frias v. Asset Foreclosure Services, Inc. green
wash · 2014
2 sentences

2019"Where a business demands payment not lawfully due, the consumer can claim injury for expenses [they] incurred in responding, even if the consumer did not remit the payment demanded." Frias, 181 Wn.2d at 431 .

2019But mental distress, embarrassment, inconvenience, and the "associated physical symptoms are not compensable under the CPA." Frias, 181 Wn.2d at 432 .

12019–2019
Washington State Department of Health v. Ongom green
scotus · 2007
1 sentence

2007Based upon the above conclusions of law, to the effect that the Licensee has failed to disclose in his Washington insurance agent’s license applications that eight complaints had been filed against him in California in violation of RCW 48.17.070 and RCW 48.17.530(l)(c), and to the effect that the Licensee has in many instances demonstrated himself to be, and has [sic] so deemed to be, untrustworthy and a source of injury and loss to the public and not qualified to be an insurance agent in the state of Washington as contemplated by RCW W48.17.530(l)(h) [sic], the Initial Decision in this matter

12007–2007
Ongom v. Dept. of Health red
wash · 2006
1 sentence

2007Based upon the above conclusions of law, to the effect that the Licensee has failed to disclose in his Washington insurance agent’s license applications that eight complaints had been filed against him in California in violation of RCW 48.17.070 and RCW 48.17.530(l)(c), and to the effect that the Licensee has in many instances demonstrated himself to be, and has [sic] so deemed to be, untrustworthy and a source of injury and loss to the public and not qualified to be an insurance agent in the state of Washington as contemplated by RCW W48.17.530(l)(h) [sic], the Initial Decision in this matter

12007–2007
Tank v. State Farm Fire and Casualty Co. green
wash · 1986
2 sentences

2007Based upon the above conclusions of law, to the effect that the Licensee has failed to disclose in his Washington insurance agent’s license applications that eight complaints had been filed against him in California in violation of RCW 48.17.070 and RCW 48.17.530(l)(c), and to the effect that the Licensee has in many instances demonstrated himself to be, and has [sic] so deemed to be, untrustworthy and a source of injury and loss to the public and not qualified to be an insurance agent in the state of Washington as contemplated by RCW W48.17.530(l)(h) [sic], the Initial Decision in this matter

2007Based upon the above conclusions of law, to the effect that the Licensee has failed to disclose in his Washington insurance agent’s license applications that eight complaints had been filed against him in California in violation of RCW 48.17.070 and RCW 48.17.530(l)(c), and to the effect that the Licensee has in many instances demonstrated himself to be, and has [sic] so deemed to be, untrustworthy and a source of injury and loss to the public and not qualified to be an insurance agent in the state of Washington as contemplated by RCW W48.17.530(l)(h) [sic], the Initial Decision in this matter

12007–2007
Ongom v. Department of Health red
wash · 2006
1 sentence

2007Based upon the above conclusions of law, to the effect that the Licensee has failed to disclose in his Washington insurance agent’s license applications that eight complaints had been filed against him in California in violation of RCW 48.17.070 and RCW 48.17.530(l)(c), and to the effect that the Licensee has in many instances demonstrated himself to be, and has [sic] so deemed to be, untrustworthy and a source of injury and loss to the public and not qualified to be an insurance agent in the state of Washington as contemplated by RCW W48.17.530(l)(h) [sic], the Initial Decision in this matter

12007–2007

Where else courts name it

FL 13 (1996–2024) CA 12 (1968–2022) TX 10 (1978–2016) WA 6 (2007–2022) MD 3 (1994–2021) MA 2 (2000–2011) KS 2 (2013–2024) CT 2 (1991–2000)

Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check