15 U.S.C. § 2301
Definitions
For definition of Canal Zone, referred to in par. (15), see section 3602(b) of Title 22, Foreign Relations and Intercourse.
Pub. L. 114–51, § 1,
Pub. L. 93–637, § 1,
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 1,484
cases (515 in the last 5 years), 1977–2026 · leading case: Borowiec v. GATEWAY 2000, INC.
Borowiec v. GATEWAY 2000, INC. (2004)
“Justice FREEMAN delivered the opinion of the court: In this appeal, we consider whether the circuit court of Cook County erred in denying the motion to dismiss or to compel arbitration filed by Gateway 2000, Inc.”
Peterson v. Volkswagen of America, Inc. (2005)
“An individual seeking to bring suit under the MMWA against a warrantor 9 must fall within one of the three categories set forth under the definition of "consumer" in 15 U.S.C. § 2301 (3). Dekelaita v. Nissan Motor Corp.”
Dekelaita v. Nissan Motor Corp. in USA (2003)
“JUSTICE GORDON delivered the opinion of the court: Martin and Akhshirash Dekelaita (plaintiffs or lessees) appeal from the circuit court of Cook County dismissing their three-count action under the Magnuson-Moss Warranty — Federal Trade Improvement Act (the Act) ( 15 U.S.C. §…”
Razor v. Hyundai Motor America (2006)
“Justice FREEMAN delivered the judgment of the court, with opinion: This appeal involves the federal Magnuson-Moss WarrantyFederal Trade Commission Improvement Act (Act) ( 15 U.S.C. § 2301 et seq. (2000)) and the Illinois Uniform Commercial Code (UCC) (810 ILCS 5/1-101 et seq.”
Dan Bennett v. CMH Homes, Inc. (2014)
“” 15 U.S.C. § 2301 (3). The Act defines a “consumer product” as “any tangible personal property which is distributed in commerce and which is normally used for personal, family, or household purposes,” including attachments to real property but excluding real property.”
Parrot v. DaimlerChrysler Corp. (2006)
“” 15 U.S.C. § 2301 (1). The parties agree that the Jeep is a consumer product.”
Mydlach v. DaimlerChrysler Corp. (2007)
“OPINION Plaintiff, Lucy Mydlach, filed a three-count complaint in the circuit court of Cook County against defendant, DaimlerChrysler Corporation, alleging claims under the Magnuson-Moss Warranty — Federal Trade Commission Improvement Act (Magnuson-Moss Act or Act) ( 15 U.S.C.…”
Koons Ford of Baltimore, Inc. v. Lobach (2007)
“("Koons Ford") and, after discovering defects in that vehicle, filed a complaint against Koons Ford in the Circuit Court, alleging, inter alia, that Koons Ford violated the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act ("MMWA"), 15 U.S.C. § 2301 et seq. Koons Ford contends that the claim must be…”
Peterson v. Volkswagen of America, Inc. (2004)
“" 15 U.S.C. § 2301 (4). In addition, a "warrantor" is defined *682 to mean "any supplier or other person who gives or offers to give a written warranty or who is or may be obligated under an implied warranty.”
Mesa v. BMW OF NORTH AMERICA, LLC (2005)
“In addition, Mesa claimed that BMWNA breached its implied warranty under 15 U.S.C. §§ 2301 (7) and 2308. Pursuant to 15 U.”
DiCintio v. DaimlerChrysler Corp. (2002)
“person to whom such product is transferred during the duration of an implied or written warranty (or service contract) applicable to the product, and any other person who is entitled by the terms of such warranty (or service contract) or under applicable State law to enforce…”
Birdsong v. Apple, Inc. (2009)
“Code § 2315; (4) violation of the California UCL, Cal. Bus. and Prof.Code §§ 17220 et seq.”
— 15 U.S.C. § 2301(1) — 3 cases
— 15 U.S.C. § 2301(3) — 1 case
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.